HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Agenda Packet 10-28-13
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
(651) 747-3900
www.lakeelmo.org
NOTICE OF MEETING
The City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission will conduct a meeting on
Monday, October 28, 2013 at 7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Approve Agenda
3. Approve Minutes
a. October 14, 2013
4. Public Hearings
a. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT – DIEDRICH/REIDER
PROPERTY. The Planning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing for a
request by the property owners to amend the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan by
changing the future land use designation of property located within the I-94
Corridor Planning Area from HDR (Urban High Density Residential) to MDR
(Urban Medium Density Residential).
b. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT – DESIGN REVIEW. The Planning
Commission is asked to hold a public hearing for a zoning text amendment
intended to update design review procedures for development activity in urban
residential and commercial zoning districts.
5. Business Items
a. DESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL. The Planning Commission is asked to
review an updated version of the Design Standards Manual and make a
recommendation to the City Council.
b. RURAL AREA DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS. The Planning Commission is
asked to review the City’s rural development areas and make a recommendation
to the City Council concerning future growth and development in these areas.
c. ANIMAL ORDINANCE UPDATE. The Planning Commission will receive an
update from the City Clerk regarding an ongoing effort to update the City’s
animal ordinances.
6. Updates
a. City Council Updates –
i. Variance - 09.029.21.22.0025 (Hill Trail North) approved at the October
15, 2013 City Council meeting.
ii. Met Council 2040 Growth Forecast Discussion
b. Staff Updates
i. Upcoming Meetings:
• November 13, 2013
• November 25, 2013
ii. Findings of Fact Worksheets - Draft
c. Commission Concerns
7. Adjourn
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of October 14, 2013
Chairman Williams called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at
7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Williams, Dorschner, Dodson, Larson, Kreimer and
Morreale;
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Haggard and Lundgren; and
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Klatt and City Planner Johnson.
Approve Agenda:
The Planning Commission accepted the agenda as presented.
Approve Minutes: September 23, 2013
M/S/P: Williams/Morreale, move to accept the minutes of September 23, 2013 as
amended, Vote: 5-0, Motion Carried, with Larson not voting.
Presentation: Manning Ave. Corridor Study – Washington County
Frank Ticknor, Washington County, started his presentation by explaining that the main
goal is to start a dialogue with all the communities along Manning Ave. (CSAH 15). This
dialogue will include analysis of existing conditions, future growth along the corridor,
and estimated future traffic volumes.
Manning Ave. is the main north-south arterial in Washington County. The County is
preparing this study to be proactive to address future needs for the roadway before
challenges arise. Ticknor gave an overview of the entire corridor from I-94 to TH-5,
showing the status of existing intersections and forecasts of future performance under a
no-build scenario. In addition, Ticknor highlighted all the goals of the Manning Ave.
Project. Goals include improving safety, managing traffic demand, improving access,
and others.
Brian Jensen, SRF, presented the schedule and stakeholders involved on the Manning
Ave. Project. Once stakeholders were identified, Washington County has been
coordinating monthly meetings with the key stakeholders. In addition, the County is
working on an extensive public engagement effort. The desired outcome includes three
documents: Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-14-13
2
1. Preliminary roadway design – mutually agreed upon by jurisdictions involved
2. Environmental document
3. Implementation plan – allows stakeholders to prioritize and time improvements
Jensen continued his presentation by explaining the Subarea Study.
Leif Garness, SRF, presented the Subarea Study in greater detail. The Subarea Study
includes three alternatives, including 1) realigning TH-5 with CSAH 14, 2) expanding
Manning Ave. to a 4-lane facility, and 3) alternatives 1 and 2 combined. The consultant
explained how all of the various alternatives impacted future traffic volumes along the
Manning Ave. Corridor and adjacent streets and corridors. The preliminary findings of
the study shows that the greatest benefit from a traffic management perspective
includes an expansion of Manning to a four-lane facility and realigning TH-5 with CSAH
14.
Dodson asked if the County has an idea of the source of the traffic along these corridors.
What percentage of the traffic is generated by residents of Washington County? Jensen
explained that the traffic data was generated by a County model not taking source into
account.
Williams asked if the type of intersection control has been studied for the realignment
of TH-5. Jensen explained that the traffic control will be studied at the next level of the
study. The City would have input on any future control or improvements.
Larson asked about the final goal of the project from a traffic perspective. The County
wants to encourage north-south travel movements, and minimize east-west traffic.
Dodson asked if the new HWY-36 Bridge is included in the Manning Ave. Study. Jensen
noted that the bridge is incorporated, but has not shown a significant impact as of yet.
Jensen concluded by presenting the project schedule. Construction phase is expected to
begin in April of 2015. The main take away is that it is important for Manning to
become a 4-lane facility.
Ticknor finished the presentation by providing contact information and the project
website.
Williams asked if the County studied directing Manning straight north to TH-36. Ticknor
stated that the limits of this project stop at TH-5. Williams also noted that the County
was able to secure grant funding to install traffic signals at Lake Elmo Ave. (CSAH 17).
Dodson noted that he would like to see the wide shoulder maintained to serve bicyclists
in Washington County. He noted that Manning Ave. is a popular route.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-14-13
3
Larson was wondering if the study was connected to the railroad crossings. Is there any
talk of over/under pass? Ticknor said that there are railroad protection zones in the
airport area, so it can’t have a vertical element. The crossing on Manning is eligible to
become a quiet zone, but the communities should participate in that aspect of the
project.
Public Hearing (cont.): Zoning Text Amendment – Village Mixed-Use Zoning District
Klatt began his presentation by explaining that the Village Mixed Use (VMX) zoning
district would be added to the Zoning Code under Article 11. He started by addressing
how multiple areas of review by the Planning Commission have been incorporated into
the current draft of the ordinance. He discussed permitted and conditional uses,
maximum site dimensions for commercial properties, screening for single family homes,
design review, and other considerations. Klatt made connections between the
proposed draft ordinance and the workshop meeting that was held on October 7th,
including the drawbacks and benefits of mixed-use zoning. Moving forward, Klatt
highlighted major decision points, including permitted vs. conditional uses, maximum
height, single family attached standards (no front-loading garages), automobile-oriented
uses, drive-through facilities, design and demolition review, and others. Finally, Klatt
discussed next steps, including zoning and Comprehensive Plan work, as well as future
work on form-based codes and implementation of design review.
Williams asked if a clean-up amendment will be necessary, as zoning standards are
found in multiple locations in the Code. Klatt confirmed that staff will have to proceed
with a clean-up amendment of the Zoning Code.
Klatt noted that staff plans on bringing forward a zoning map amendment to implement
the new Village Mixed-Use (VMX) zoning district.
Dorschner asked where the 50-year timeframe comes under the demolition review
section. Klatt noted that 50-years was the base standard under historic preservation
that qualifies a building as historic.
Related to demolition review, Dodson asked about who determines that an applicant
cannot obtain a reasonable economic return. Klatt noted that the Planning Commission
and Council make that determination.
Public Hearing closed at 8:12pm.
Dorschner asked about the 3 criteria for demolition of structures in the mixed-use
district, including structural defects, threat to public safety and economic feasibility of
repair. He asked if all 3 were required, or if applicants only have to meet one of these
criterion. Klatt stated that applicant must meet one of the three criterion.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-14-13
4
Dodson asked for further clarification related to the review process for design review.
He thought the title was confusing. The Planning Commission consented to a title
change.
Dodson asked about placeholders and if they should have direction with them for the
time being so there is a process associated with them. Klatt suggested just removing
them for the time being if the ordinance is adopted. They were in the draft as a tool to
look at later.
Dodson asked if two-family dwelling should be exempted. Klatt suggested that it should
be exempted.
Dorschner noted that he is concerned that the criterion for the demolition review are
subjective. Williams noted that he views the demolition review as similar to a PUD
situation, where the applicants and City come to an agreement. Dorschner noted that
he is concerned that some buildings that were built 50 years ago were of poor
construction and should not be preserved. Williams suggested making all buildings built
before 1950 eligible for demolition review. Larson noted that some structures have
been added upon and there are portions of the buildings that are built post 1950 and
other portions that were built pre-1950. Dorschner reiterated his concern that the
demolition review is subjective. Klatt suggested using the language “built prior to 1950”
and “meeting 1 or more of the following” regarding the required findings. Johnson
asked if single family homes should be included or if there should be different
standards. Williams felt the older buildings helped with the old town feel that we want.
Kreimer suggested applications to demolish any structure built before 1950 should be
reviewed according to the following criteria.
Williams noted that there is no reference to a Village Green in the zoning district. He
asked if there should be a reference. Klatt noted that the best way to implement a
Village Green is to either zone property for public use or partner with a private
developer on a mixed use project that includes a green.
Larson is concerned that the City is letting go of control to incorporate a downtown
gathering amenity. Klatt highlighted the tools that the city can use to take a more active
role in working towards a master planned village green development.
Williams noted one other update related to the definition of development activity.
M/S/P: Larson/Dodson, move to recommend approval of the ordinance as amended in
the discussion, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
Business Item: Design Standards Manual
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-14-13
5
Johnson presented a final draft of the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual. Williams
noted that there were a few minor modifications to the document that was distributed
at the October 7, 2013 workshop. These modifications were only in regards to pictures,
and did not change the text in the document.
Johnson reviewed the purpose of the design standards manual, which is for site and
building review in the VMX, Commercial, Business Park and High Density Residential
zones. He also discussed the performance standards used in current zoning districts,
and summarized the process to date. He noted that Staff has presented previous drafts
to the Planning Commission and has conducted a stakeholder meeting with members of
the business and development community.
Johnson reviewed contents of the design standards manual with the Commission and
noted some of the specific standards that were proposed.
Williams questioned why there was no list of preferred building materials for high
density residential structures. He also asked about the use of translucent glass in the
High Density Residential section and suggested that this be moved back to the general
section.
Dodson stated that the review should be completed by the final development approval
for compliance purposes.
Johnson noted that the document provides a balance between permissive and
mandatory language. Kreimer suggested that the manual include more mandatory
language for certain elements, including streetscape design, landscaping, and scale and
mass of buildings. Johnson stated that some things might be mandatory based on use.
Williams questioned the wording related to roof materials and the permissive language
in one section of the manual.
Dodson asked whether or not the City would prohibit certain types of development
from being built in the community. Johnson replied that the standards generally should
not keep a business from locating in the community that wants to be located in Lake
Elmo. He further reiterated that the manual attempted for a balance between good
design and standards that are not overly restrictive.
Dorschner noted some inconsistencies between various sections of the manual.
Johnson noted that he would make revisions to improve the consistency between the
various sections.
Kreimer questioned why there were no specific recommendations from the theming
work that was recently completed. He also suggested that some of the pictures be
amended, especially those that depict buildings that do not step the upper floors back
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-14-13
6
from the street. Johnson replied that the theming work was focused on public areas
rather than private development sites. He stated that he would look for opportunities
to reference the theming work and that he would also review the pictures for buildings
over two stories in height.
Dodson asked for clarification concerning the use of the term complementary and how
this would be interpreted. The Commission discussed if earth tone should be used. He
noted that the high density residential section was the only one to reference a
maximum height for parking lot lights. The Commission generally discussed the need
for separate height requirements for different uses.
Kreimer pointed out that the building placement section in the high density residential
section appears to be contradictory with regards to setback requirements.
Williams commented that the parking setback requirements should reference the
Zoning Ordinance rather than being listed separately in the manual. He suggested that
the lighting section reference dark sky/light pollution as one of the objectives. He
further noted that the manual does not reference electronic message signs. Williams
suggested that the manual reference restricted root zones. He asked that the manual
include a reference to historic buildings and reflecting or recalling the historic character
of existing buildings in the Village. Williams made additional suggestions for revisions to
the document.
The Commission generally suggested that the document incorporate additional
language pertaining to the Village planning area.
It was suggested that in general, metal should be allowed as a building material.
Johnson stated that he would do some more research on the use of metal building
materials.
There was a general discussion concerning landscaping of parking areas and the
required setbacks within business park areas.
Johnson reviewed the next steps in the process, and noted that he would be refining the
draft design standards manual based on the comments from the Planning Commission.
There will be a public hearing at the October 28, 2013 meeting to adopt it into zoning
code.
Williams suggested providing notice to the development community once the final draft
has been prepared.
Williams wants a motion to encourage the City Council to proceed with developing a
master plan for a Village green. Dodson stated that from a practical standpoint, how
would it get implemented and would it be economically feasible? Dorschner stated that
if restricted by a plan, it would be hard to implement and would be expensive if planned
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-14-13
7
to be placed in a specific spot. Williams likes the idea of a Village Green. It doesn’t have
to be large, but he would like to be proactive in regards to it. Larson would like
someone who knows about the vision Lake Elmo has to work with developers on the
features we would like. Klatt suggested that it might be leaping ahead to be talking
about this now. There currently is no approved Comprehensive Plan. We would need
to have that before we talk about a Village Green. It would be good to talk to the City
Council about it and get it on the 2014 work plan and incorporate this discussion with
the Village land use plan.
Updates and Concerns
Council Updates
1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Landucci Property approved by City Council
contingent on Met Council approval.
2. Landucci Sketch Plan, submitted by Ryland Homes, was reviewed by the City
Council.
3. Variance – 09.029.21.22.0025 (Hill Trail North) was postponed to the October 15,
2013 meeting.
Staff Updates
1. Staff will be preparing a worksheet for finding of fact as a tool for the
Commission to use for future land use decisions.
2. Planning Commission meetings upcoming on October 28th and November 13th.
The meeting on 11/13/13 is on a Wednesday due to the Veterans Day holiday.
Commission Concerns – None
Meeting adjourned at 10:18pm
Respectfully submitted,
Nick Johnson
City Planner
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-14-13
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 10/28/13
AGENDA ITEM: 4A – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2013-35
ITEM: Comprehensive Plan Amendment – Diedrich Property
SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
Washington County
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a request to amend the Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan to change the future land use designation of property immediately east of Lake
Elmo Avenue and approximately 2,200 feet north of Interstate 94 from HDR – Urban High Density
Residential to MDR – Urban Medium Density Residential. The applicant has submitted a
Preliminary Sketch Plan for a proposed residential subdivision to support the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment (CPA) request. It is anticipated that the applicants will be presenting a formal Sketch
Plan at an upcoming Planning Commission meeting. Staff is recommending that the Planning
Commission recommend approval of the request.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Tammy Diedrich and Gary Reider, 7401 Wyndham Way, Woodbury, MN
Property Owners: Tammy Diedrich and Gary Reider, 7401 Wyndham Way, Woodbury, MN
Location: Part of Section 36 in Lake Elmo, north of I-94, east of Lake Elmo Avenue, and
south of the Cimarron Manufactured Home Park. PID Number
36.029.21.32.0002
Request: Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment – HDR to MDR
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Existing Zoning: RT – Rural Transitional Zoning
Surrounding Land Use: North – manufactured home park; west – vacant/agricultural land, south
– single family home and golf practice facility, and east – light industrial
Surrounding Zoning: RT – Rural Transitional; RS – Single Family Residential; MDR – Urban
Medium Residential
Comprehensive Plan: Urban High Density (7.5 – 15 units per acre)
Proposed Zoning: MDR – Urban Medium Density Residential
History: The subject property is currently vacant.
Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 10/2/13
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a – ACTION ITEM
2
60 Day Deadline – 12/1/13
Extension Letter Mailed – No
120 Day Deadline – 1/30/14
Applicable Regulations: Article 10 – Urban Residential Districts (MDR)
REQUEST DETAILS
The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Tammy Diedrich and Gary Reider for a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of property north of
Interstate 94 and east of Lake Elmo Avenue from High Density Residential (HDR) to Medium
Density Residential (MDR). This property is located within the I-94 Corridor Planning Area, and
was included in the previous Comprehensive Plan Amendment to incorporate the I-94 Land Use
Plan. The property is presently owned by Tammy Diedrich and Gary Reider and is under contract for
purchase by Pratt Homes. Pratt would like to develop the property as a single family
attached/detached townhome development at a density that is lower than the future land use guidance
of HDR (7.5 to 15 units per acre) that was approved as part of the Comprehensive Plan Update.
In addition to the request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the applicant has submitted a
preliminary sketch plan to aid the review of the CPA. The preliminary sketch plan includes 48 total
residential units (22 attached, 26 detached). While it is difficult to calculate an accurate figure for net
density at this time, it is anticipated that the proposed townhome development will have a net density
that is consistent with the City’s Urban Medium Density Residential – MDR land use category.
Finally, it is likely that the applicants will be presenting a Sketch Plan for formal review at an
upcoming Planning Commission meeting in the future.
BACKGROUND
The applicant’s site is currently vacant and is approximately ½ mile south of 10th Street (CSAH 10),
and just south of Cimarron Manufactured Home Park and Golf Course. Water services have been
requested by the applicant, but would need to be installed as part of a larger City project to extend
water down Lake Elmo Avenue.
When the City drafted the future land use map for this area as part of the I-94 Comprehensive Plan
Update last year, this site was guided for high density residential development at a density of 7.5 to
15 units per acre. The applicants have stated that the existing HDR – High Density Residential
guidance for this site is not consistent with plans to develop the site as proposed in the submitted
preliminary sketch plan. Due to this inconsistency, the applicants are petitioning the City to change
the future land use map for this area to MDR – Medium Density Residential. Based upon a similar
request for the property to the south of the Diedrich property, as well as other feedback from the
development community in general, the market for high density multi-family housing does not
appear strong for this location at this time.
Finally, it should be noted that the property to the south the Diedrich property, the Landucci property,
is currently under contract by Ryland Homes. Ryland also petitioned the City for an amendment of
the future land use map in the Comprehensive Plan for this property, changing the land use
designation from Urban Medium Density Residential – MDR to Urban Low Density Residential –
LDR. The City Council approved this request on 10/1/13 (Resolution #2013-086) contingent upon
Met Council approval. In addition, Ryland completed a Sketch Plan review with the Planning
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a – ACTION ITEM
3
Commission and City Council on 9/23/13 and 10/1/13 respectively. As part of the Ryland submittal
process for the Landucci property, the alignment of the 5th Street minor collector road was relocated
to the south to accommodate all parties. This alignment has been mutually agreed upon by all parties
and is included in both the sketch plan for the Landucci property (Ryland) and preliminary sketch
plan for the Diedrich property (Pratt).
PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES
The City undertook a lengthy process to update the Comprehensive Plan for the I-94 Corridor, which
included establishing a work group to help craft the overall land use plan and conducting a series of
meetings in order to receive public comments concerning the plan. The updated plan made several
modifications from the City’s earlier plans, and most significantly, created several different
categories of residential development. The approved plan now establishes three distinct residential
planning categories that use increasing densities to separate each of these residential areas ranging
from low density to high density. The City was also able to successfully negotiate a lower threshold
at the bottom end of the density scale in order to better respond to current market conditions.
In order to achieve the growth targets as specifies in the City’s Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) with the Met Council, the City did need guide a certain portion of the I-94 Corridor for
medium and high density residential development. The applicant’s site was determined to be an
appropriate location for high density housing. This decision was partly based on comments from the
impacting property owners stating their desire to guide their properties for the higher density
residential development.
The applicant’s parcel and parcel to the south are somewhat unique because they are isolated from
the larger residential areas within the I-94 corridor. The subject parcel is located immediately
adjacent to land that is guided for Business Park development, while the remaining property it
borders is guided for high density residential. The property is also close in proximity to The Forest
single family residential neighborhood. Given the surrounding land uses, a rational argument could
be made to either keep this area guided for higher density residential development in order to provide
for additional buffering from future business park uses, or to change the designation to medium
density in order to better fit with the existing neighborhood across the street and the single family
development expected on the Landucci property to the south.
In order to consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the Planning Commission should take into
account any changes that may have occurred in the community since the Comprehensive Plan was
adopted that would warrant an amendment. In this case, it has been a very short time since the I-94
Corridor Land Use plan was adopted; however, Staff would like to note that in the time since
adoption there has been considerable interest in development from the market that was either lacking
or non-existent in the recent past. Based upon the nature of the development interest generated thus
far, there has been little interest in multi-family residential projects in the areas that have been guided
for such uses. Obviously the market can and will change in the future, but the City will be faced with
significant infrastructure costs (and potential penalties under the MOU) should projects fail to
materialize.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a – ACTION ITEM
4
The applicant’s site is 14.34 acres in size, representing a small portion of the total I-94 development
area. Given the size of the parcel, the proposed reduction in overall density will not have a significant
impact on the overall projections for residential units in this area. Additionally, the three residential
categories that are used in the Comprehensive Plan are defined by a range of units, which provides
some additional room for the City to achieve its City’s growth targets while taking into account the
uncertainty surrounding the true development potential for any given parcel of land. The City did not
perform any detailed studies to identify how much of each parcel in the corridor was developable
(i.e. not wetland, heavily wooded, located on steep slopes, etc.), and the range will allow some
leeway for allowing an appropriate level of development that is consistent with the City’s overall
goals and objectives for growth and development.
Staff is also continuing to work with the Met Council to achieve the City Council’s stated objective
of reducing the overall residential unit counts that are mandated under the MOU. Given recent
conversations with the Met Council, the City anticipates that some relief will be granted, reducing the
overall projected REC unit and population figures as part of the upcoming 2040 projections. It is
Staff’s initial opinion that any reductions would likely occur in the areas of the City that are guided
for the denser residential categories since it may be difficult to develop the entirety of these areas at
the planned higher densities.
Finally, it should be noted that Washington County submitted review comments related to the
requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Washington County’s review comments can be found in
attachment #5. While the majority of the review comments are applicable to the Preliminary Sketch
Plan submitted by the applicants, it should be noted that Washington County does not offer any
objection to the request to amend the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
DRAFT FINDINGS
Given the relatively small size of the applicant’s parcel (taking into account potential changes in the
vicinity) and the current lack of interest in high density, or multi-family, residential development,
Staff is supportive of the proposed amendment and is recommending approval of the requested
change to the Comprehensive Plan based on the following findings:
1. That the proposed area impacted by the proposed amendment is relatively small and will not
have a significant impact on the City’s ability to achieve its 2030 household and population
forecasts.
2. That current market conditions are not favorable for multi-family housing, yet it is in the
City’s interests to accommodate market-driven development at present in order to provide a
reasonable return on recent major infrastructure improvements.
3. That the City is continuing to work towards potential reductions to the 2030 growth targets
specified in the Met Council MOU that will likely reduce the amount of areas in the
community that are guided for high density housing.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of request by Tammy
Diedrich and Gary Reider to amend the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan by changing the future land
use designation of property immediately east of Lake Elmo Avenue and approximately ½ mile south
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a – ACTION ITEM
5
of 10th Street North (PID: 36.029.21.32.0002) from HDR – Urban High Density Residential to MDR
– Urban Medium Density Residential. Suggested motion:
“Move to recommend approval of the request by Tammy Diedrich and Gary Reider to amend the
Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings outlined in the Staff Report”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application w/Narrative and Preliminary Sketch Plan
2. Location Map
3. Future Land Use Map (Map 3-3 from Comprehensive Plan)
4. Proposed Amendment: MDR to LDR
5. Washington County Review Comments
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ....................................................... Community Development Director
- Report by Staff .................................................. Community Development Director
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Open the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Close the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a – ACTION ITEM
The Forest
LanducciProperty
CimarronPark
La
k
e
E
l
m
o
A
v
e
")17
Hudson
B
l
v
d
N
3rd St Pl N
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping,
Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Data Scource: Washington County, MN
10-22-2013
Location Map: Diedrich Property (PIN: 36.029.21.32.0002)
K05001,000250 Feet
1"=500'
§¨¦94
Diedrich Property
Village
Land Use
Plan
Pending
Sources: Washington County & Metro GIS10-22-2013
5
Planned Land Use
Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan 2030
Map 3-3
Planned Land Uses
Residential Estate
Rural Area Development
Rural Area Development Alt
Rural Single Family
Public/Park
Urban High Density
Urban Medium Density
Commercial
Limited Business
Business Park
Urban Low Density
Village Mixed Use
Village Urban Low Density
Village Urban Medium Density
Municipal Boundary
White hatching denotes possible mixed use areas
Cimarron Park
The Forest
Interstate 94
La
k
e
E
l
m
o
A
v
e
Ma
n
n
i
n
g
A
v
e
Proposed Amendment: HDR to MDR
10th St
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 10/28/13
AGENDA ITEM: 4B – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2013-37
ITEM: Zoning Text Amendment – Residential and Commercial Design Review
SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a Zoning Text Amendment intended to update
the City’s design review procedures for development activity in urban residential and commercial
districts. The City has been engaged in a long process to develop a design standards manual to serve
as the main mechanism for design review. The Zoning Text Amendment as proposed will replace
the existing design review provisions by adopting the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual by
reference. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the
proposed Design Review Ordinance
STAFF REPORT:
As part of the effort to develop a comprehensive design standards manual, it is necessary to amend
the Zoning Code to adopt the manual by reference and remove any conflicting provisions. Within
Article XII - Commercial Districts, there are existing design related performance standards. These
performance standards were carried over from the City’s other commercial districts and were
intended to serve as a mechanism for design review in the interim period before adopting the design
standards manual. Now that the city has progressed far enough towards a final draft of the manual, it
is now necessary to amend the code to integrate the manual into the Zoning Code. This zoning text
amendment is intended to complete this process. Also, it should be noted that the existing design
standards located in Article XII – Commercial Districts will be struck and replaced by the proposed
language.
Within the proposed ordinance, the design standards manual is adopted by reference in both Article
X – Urban Residential Districts and Article XII – Commercial Districts. The language proposed is
nearly identical to the language that was used in the draft Village Mixed-Use (VMX) zoning district,
which also adopted the design standards manual by reference. Regarding process, the proposed
ordinance notes that the review procedures outlined in the VMX district will be followed in the
Urban Residential and Commercial zoning districts by linkage (§154.506.A). This method to
reference the review procedure is temporary. Ultimately, Staff would like to relocate the design
review procedures back to the Article III – Zoning Administration and Enforcement. Therefore, with
the ordinance as proposed, staff should be able to change the links once the design review procedures
are moved to Article III, minimizing future amendments to the Zoning Code.
RECCOMENDATION:
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – ACTION ITEM
2
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed Design
Review Ordinance to the City Council through the following motion:
“Move to recommend approval of the Design Review Ordinance.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. DRAFT §154.455 and §154.555
2. Existing Commercial District Design Standards
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction .......................................................................................... City Planner
- Report by Staff ..................................................................................... City Planner
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Open the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Close the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – ACTION ITEM
ARTICLE 10. URBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
§154.455 Residential District Design Standards
§ 154.555 Residential District Design Standards
Review of Design. For certain development activity as specified in the Lake Elmo Design Standards
Manual, design review is required as part of the approval process for a permit or certificate under this
Ordinance. All projects subject to design review shall be reviewed for conformance with the Lake Elmo
Design Standards Manual and shall follow the review procedures specified in 154.506.A.
ARTICLE 12. COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
§154.555 Commercial District Design Standards
§ 154.555 Commercial District Design Standards
Review of Design. For certain development activity as specified in the Lake Elmo Design Standards
Manual, design review is required as part of the approval process for a permit or certificate under this
Ordinance. All projects subject to design review shall be reviewed for conformance with the Lake Elmo
Design Standards Manual and shall follow the review procedures specified in 154.506.A.
DRAFT 10/28/13 1 Urban Residential and Commercial Districts
Existing Commercial District Design Standards (to be replaced)
§ 154.555 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS.
(A) Purpose and Intent. It is the purpose and intent of the city, by the adoption of the
performance standards of this article, to ensure commercial buildings constructed within the city
are of a high quality of exterior appearance and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. These
standards shall apply to all commercial districts within the city.
(1) It is the finding of the city that a limited selection of primary exterior surfacing
materials meets this standard of quality.
(2) It is the further finding of the city that several specific exterior surfacing materials
are appropriate, and of sufficient quality, to be utilized only as accent materials in varying
percentages. The variations of percentage of specific accent materials relates to a finding by the
city as to the relative quality and rural character of those respective accent materials.
(B) Architectural and Site Plan Submittals. New building proposals shall include
architectural and site plans prepared by registered architect and shall show the following as a
minimum:
(1) Elevations of all sides of the buildings;
(2) Type and color of exterior building materials;
(3) Typical general floor plans;
(4) Dimensions of all structures; and
(5) Location of trash containers, heating, cooling and ventilation equipment and
systems.
(C) Applicability - Structure Additions and Renovation.
(1) Additions to existing structures resulting in an increase of gross floor area of the
structure of less than 100%; and/or installation of replacement exterior surfacing of any portion
of an existing structure shall be exempt from the standards of this division where it is found that
the new or replacement exterior surfacing proposed is identical to that of the existing structure.
(2) Where additions to an existing structure result in an increase in the gross floor area
of the existing structure of 100% or greater, the entire structure (existing structure and structure
addition) shall be subject to the standards of this section.
(D) Performance Standards - Primary Exterior Surfacing.
(1) The primary exterior surfacing of structures shall be limited to natural brick, stone,
or glass. Artificial or thin veneer brick or stone less than nominal 4 inches thick shall not qualify
as complying with this performance standard.
(2) Primary Exterior Surface shall be defined as not less than 70% of the sum of the area
of all exterior walls of a structure nominally perpendicular to the ground. All parapet or mansard
surfaces extending above the ceiling height of the structure shall be considered exterior surface
for the purposes of this division. Windows and glass doors shall be considered a primary surface,
but the sum area of this glass shall be deducted from the wall area for purposes of the 70%
primary/30% accent formulas of this chapter. Doors of any type of material, except glass, shall
not be considered a primary exterior surface.
(3) Each wall of the structure shall be calculated separately and, individually comply
with the 70/30 formula.
(E) Performance Standards - Exterior Surfacing Accents. Not more than 30% of the
exterior wall surfacing, as defined by division (D) of this section, may be of the following listed
accent materials, but no single accent material, except natural wood, may comprise more than
20% of the total of all accent materials; and, no combustible materials shall be used:
(1) Cedar, redwood, wood siding;
(2) Cement fiber board;
(3) Standing seam metal;
(4) Architectural metal;
(5) Stucco;
(6) Poured in place concrete (excluding “tilt-up” panels);
(7) Architectural metal panels; and
(8) Porcelain or ceramic tile.
(F) Performance Standard - Accessory Structures. All accessory structures shall comply
with the exterior surfacing requirements specified by division (D) of this section.
(G) Performance Standard - HVAC Units and Exterior Appurtenances. All exterior
equipment, HVAC and trash/recycling and dock areas shall be screened from view of the public
with the primary exterior materials used on the principal structure.
(H) Performance Standard - Visible Roofing Materials. Any roofing materials that are
visible from ground level shall be standing seam metal, fire-treated cedar shakes, ceramic tile,
clay tile, concrete or slate.
(I) Applicability - New Construction. The standards of this division shall be applicable to
all structures and buildings constructed in the city, on and after the effective date of this chapter.
The performance standards of this division shall not be in any manner minimized by subsequent
planned unit development plans or agreement.
(Ord. 2012-062, passed 9-18-2012)
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 10/28/13
AGENDA ITEM: 5A – BUSINESS
CASE # 2013-34
ITEM: Design Standards Manual
SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider an updated version of the Lake Elmo Design
Standards Manual. The Planning Commission reviewed the draft document at the previous meeting
(10/14/13) and provided significant feedback. The document has been updated to address the review
comments and questions of the Planning Commission. Staff is recommending that the Planning
Commission recommend formal adoption of the Design Standards Manual to the City Council.
REQUEST DETAILS
The Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual is intended to replace existing design related performance
standards currently found in specific zoning districts in the Zoning Code. The manual will support
design review procedures for all development, redevelopment and major building/renovation activity
in 4 land use types: 1) High Density Residential, 2) Commercial, 3) Business Park, and 4) Mixed-
Use. To integrate the new design review procedure, the city’s Zoning Code must be updated to adopt
the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual by reference. These updates will occur in Article X –
Urban Residential Districts and Article XII – Commercial Districts.
STAFF REPORT
The Planning Commission provided thorough feedback on the content of the draft manual at the
meeting on 10/14/13. The manual has since been updated with the following edits:
• The compliance section of the introduction was updated to provide greater clarity and detail
regarding the timing of the design review process and responsible review authority.
• Conflicting standards related to setbacks of high density residential buildings were better
integrated as to not create confusion about building location.
• Regarding street or boulevard trees, language was added to all sections to encourage tree
species selection that considers root zone and salt tolerance.
• Language was added to encourage applicants to utilize streetscape amenities and designs that
are consistent with the Lake Elmo Branding and Theming Study.
• A list of preferred building materials was added to the high density residential section.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5A – ACTION ITEM
2
• Related to the height of lighting in all sections, specific heights were removed in favor of
language that references the standards within the City’s outdoor lighting ordinance.
• Specific parking area setbacks were removed from the Commercial and Business Park
sections. These zoning provisions will remain in the Zoning Code.
• The guidelines related to form and façade within the Commercial section were updated to
include provisions that all sides of structures should include architectural treatments. This is
consistent with the standards for the high density residential section, which do not allow any
blank facades.
• The Commercial, Business Park and Mixed-Use sections were updated to require applicants
to submit samples of building materials in advance of building permit approval.
• The allowed building materials in the Business Park section was amended to include quality
metals.
• The Mixed Use section was updated to include additional references to the existing small-
town character of the Village in the introduction and form and façade subsections.
• Two images that the Planning Commission felt were not consistent with their vision for
future development outcomes were replaced with updated images. More specifically, the
Planning Commission wanted to include more buildings that utilize “step-back” technique for
reducing building mass and scale.
With the addition of these recommended changes, it is staff’s goal to move the design standards
manual towards formal adoption. Once the Planning Commission makes a formal recommendation,
the recommended draft will be presented to the City Council.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend formal adoption of the Design
Standards Manual to the City Council through the following motion:
“Move to recommend approval of the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual – Draft 10/28/13
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction .......................................................................................... City Planner
- Report by Staff ..................................................................................... City Planner
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5A – ACTION ITEM
1City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
City of Lake Elmo
DESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL
2 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
This page left blank intentionally.
3City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
Chapter 1:
Introduction ..................................................5
Intent and Purpose
Areas of Growth
Structure of the Standards
Compliance
Chapter 2:
High Density Residential Development ...7
A. Site Design ........................................................7
Building Placement
Streetscape
Landscaping
Parking
Delivery, Service, Storage and Utility Areas
B. Building Design .................................................9
Form and Facade
Building Materials
Scale and Mass
Roof Design
Entries
Lighting
Signage
Chapter 3:
Commercial Development ......................13
A. Site Design ......................................................13
Building Placement
Streetscape
Landscaping
Parking
Delivery, Service, Storage and Utility Areas
B. Building Design ...............................................15
Form and Facade
Building Materials
Scale and Mass
Roof Design
Entries
Lighting
Signage
Chapter 4:
Business Park Development ...................19
A. Site Design ......................................................19
Building Placement
Streetscape
Landscaping
Parking
Delivery, Service, Storage and Utility Areas
B. Building Design ...............................................21
Form and Facade
Building Materials
Scale and Mass
Roof Design
Entries
Lighting
Signage
Chapter 5:
Mixed Use Development ..........................25
A. Site Design ......................................................25
Building Placement
Streetscape
Landscaping
Parking
Delivery, Service, Storage and Utility Areas
B. Building Design ...............................................27
Form and Facade
Building Materials
Scale and Mass
Roof Design
Entries
Lighting
Signage
Table of ConTenTs
4 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
This page left blank intentionally.
5City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
Introduction1
Intent and Purpose
The City of Lake Elmo is currently preparing for
a significant amount of growth and development
in two areas of the city: the I-94 Corridor and Old
Village. To ensure that growth is carried out in a
manner reflective of the goals and principles of
Lake Elmo, measures are being taken to ensure
development outcomes of a high quality. Included
in these measures is the creation of design stan-
dards, establishing requirements and guidelines
related to site design and building form. The pur-
pose of these standards is to incorporate the fol-
lowing principles in residential and commercial de-
velopment outcomes in the I-94 Corridor and Old
Village:
1. To ensure high quality site design and
building materials, supporting both function
and form;
2. To provide open space in future areas of
growth, building off of Lake Elmo’s existing
character and environment;
3. To accommodate automobile traffic in a
manner that respects the pedestrian
environment;
4. To utilize natural and ecological systems into
public and private development, particularly
in the realm of storm water management;
5. To encourage site design that is mindful and
conscientious of the existing landscape and
topography; and
6. To foster connections between the new
and existing areas of Lake Elmo through
consistent standards and theming, resulting
in an identity that is unique to this community.
The two areas guided for sewered residential and
commercial development in Lake Elmo are the I-94
Corridor and Old Village. While both of these ar-
eas are guided for future growth and have ample
greenfield development opportunity, it is important
to recognize the differences between these dis-
tricts as they pertain to geography and character.
These differences will play a major role in the types
of development that are realized in each area.
Areas of Growth
I-94 Corridor. The I-94 Corridor is geographically
bounded by CR-10 (10th St.) and I-94 from north
to south and CR-15 (Manning Ave.) to CR-13 (In-
wood Ave.) from east to west. The City has guided
this corridor for residential development of vari-
ous densities, as well as commercial and business
park development. Given its location and high
level of access, the vision for this corridor is more
highway-oriented by nature, offering good opportu-
nities for higher density and commercial develop-
ment. In addition, the City has envisioned this area
to provide increased employment opportunities in
Lake Elmo.
Old Village. The Old Village is located in the heart
of Lake Elmo, centered along State Highway 5 and
bordered to the east by CR-15 (Manning Ave.) and
to the south by 30th St. As the historic center of
Lake Elmo, the Old Village is guided for residen-
tial and mixed-use development types, which are
consistent with historic downtown areas. In order
to reinforce the identity of the Old Village as a des-
tination, it is the City’s goal to emphasize a posi-
tive pedestrian environment, consistent with main
street character. Given this vision and the historic
context, the Old Village will most likely attract dif-
ferent development types than the I-94 Corridor.
Considering the character, geography, and visions
for these two growth areas, it is unreasonable
to expect that the development types will be the
same. However, in order to establish standards for
high quality sites and buildings in Lake Elmo, the
design standards laid out in this manual will be ap-
plicable to development within both the I-94 Cor-
ridor and Old Village.
6 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
InTroduCTIon
Structure of the Standards
The standards contained within this manual are
structured in a manner that establishes standards
and desired outcomes for private development
sites within four land use types guided for the I-94
Corridor and Old Village. The four land use types,
or development types, addressed in this manual
are as follows:
1. High Density Residential;
2. Commercial;
3. Business Park; and
4. Mixed-Use.
In addition to land use types, the standards are
organized into two primary categories: Site Design
and Building Design. The standards contained
within these categories are organized using the
following sub-categories:
1. Site Design
• Building Placement
• Streetscape
• Landscaping
• Parking
• Delivery, Service, Storage and Utility Areas
2. Building Design
• Form and Facade
• Building Materials
• Scale and Mass
• Roof Design
• Entries
• Signage
• Lighting
These categories and respective sub-categories
are intended to organize the specific standards
within each land use or development type.
Compliance
As part of the City’s development review process,
any new development, redevelopment, or major
renovation within the I-94 Corridor and Old Village
will be reviewed for compliance to the standards
contained within this manual. Design review will be
completed within the established review process
at the stage of final development or building ap-
proval. This review will be conducted by the indi-
vidual or body authorizing the permit or certificate.
Exceptions to the standards contained within the
manual may be granted by the Review Authority un-
der but not limited to the following circumstances:
• The proposed project is found to be of an archi-
tectural value above and beyond the accepted
standard and therefore a community asset;
• The proposed project demonstrates a commit-
ment to theming elements and open-space
character, thereby supporting Lake Elmo’s
unique identity;
• The proposed project is found to prioritize
pedestrian circulation and safety, including
streetscape treatments above the minimum
standards that contribute to a positive pedes-
trian environment;
• The proposed project demonstrates a signifi-
cant commitment to natural storm water man-
agement practices; or
• The proposed project includes a significant
commitment to sustainable building practices,
similar to the standards required for LEED cer-
tification.
In order to receive relief or exception to the stan-
dards within the manual, it is the responsibility of
the applicant to demonstrate why a specific stan-
dard presents an unreasonable burden in the con-
text of the proposed site or project.
7City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
High Density Residential Development2
Both the I-94 Corridor and Old Village are expected
to experience growth in the form of high density
residential development. This growth will be com-
prised of single-family attached (townhome) devel-
opment and multi-family residential development,
including apartments and condominiums. For
residential development, the intent of the design
standards is to provide housing of a high aesthetic
quality with open or recreational spaces integrated
directly into the site.
A. Site Design
Building Placement
Goal: Structures should be located and oriented in a
manner that allows for pedestrian accessibility and
provides visual interest from the public right of way.
a. Buildings are encouraged to be located as
close to the public street as possible while still
meeting the setback requirement. In addition,
the setbacks of adjacent residential buildings
are encouraged to be varied slightly to contrib-
ute to an interesting streetscape, avoiding mo-
notonous facade or wall depth.
b. Buildings should be easily accessed from the
street, particularly near commercial or mixed-
use development.
c. The area fronting the main public street, or
front-yard setback area, should be utilized for
entryways, landscaping, porches, patios and
other amenities that may be utilized by resi-
dents and provide visual interest or a sense
of place.
d. Recreational and common spaces should be
located at the interior or rear of the site to pro-
mote access and safety for residents. Keep-
ing these spaces out of the front of the site
also helps maintain visual interest and attrac-
tive sight lines.
e. Some provision of open or common space on
the site is required to maintain Lake Elmo’s
open space character. This provision can
be found in §154.454 of the Lake Elmo City
Code.
Applicable Zoning Districts:
• Urban Medium Density Residential (MDR) • Urban High Density Residential (HDR)
Common open or recreation spaces should be located to
the interior or rear of the site.
Buildings are encouraged to be sited closer to public streets
to promote access and visual interest.
8 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
HIgH densIT y resIdenTIal developmenT
Streetscape
Goal: Residential streetscapes should provide for
pedestrian accessibility and safety while offering
aesthetically pleasing environments.
a. Sidewalks shall be provided parallel to public
streets in order to ensure pedestrian accessi-
bility and circulation.
b. Sidewalk materials should be attractive and
low-maintenance, such as concrete or decora-
tive pavers.
c. Boulevard areas should planted with turf grass
and/or other attractive, low-maintenance
ground cover. In addition, boulevard trees
should be provided in regular intervals.
d. Site furnishings such as benches, pedestrian-
scaled lighting, decorative fencing, trash recep-
tacles and other amenities are recommended.
Applicants are encouraged to utilize design el-
ements and site amenities from the Lake Elmo
Branding & Theming Study.
e. Paths and access points/entryways should be
clearly visible and well lit at night.
Landscaping
Goal: To enhance the visual aesthetic of the built
environment and reduce impervious surface,
thereby aiding storm water management practice.
a. Shade and ornamental trees and other plant
material should be installed within the front
setback area.
b. Bare soils should be planted or mulched with
bark, stone or other suitable material to avoid
unnecessary runoff.
c. Plant species are encouraged to be native, low-
maintenance and suitable to the Lake Elmo cli-
mate.
d. Making use of similar plant materials as adja-
cent properties and public spaces is encour-
aged to create continuity.
e. Mature trees located on building sites should
be retained whenever possible.
f. Service, storage, utility and parking areas
should be buffered by plantings to reduce vi-
sual impact.
g. Parking areas should include landscaped is-
lands or plant beds to reduce the visual im-
pact, break up monotonous hardscape and
retain storm water.
h. The installation of rain gardens is encouraged
to improve on-site storm water infiltration.
At left: Pedestrian amenities contribute to an inviting and
functional streetscape.
Decorative fencing provides a nice transition from the public right of way to the entryway.
9City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
HIgH densIT y resIdenTIal developmenT
Parking
Goal: To accommodate automobile parking in a
manner that reduces visual impact, supports pe-
destrian circulation and maintains good sight lines
along the public right of way.
a. Parking areas should be located to the rear, side
or within primary buildings whenever possible.
b. Structured or underground parking is encour-
aged.
c. The linear measurement of surface parking ar-
eas parallel to the public street may not exceed
more than 50% of primary street frontages.
Sites or projects that are unable to meet this
requirement will be required to install berms
and/or additional landscaping to buffer areas
of surface parking adjacent to the primary
street frontage.
d. Access to parking areas should be designed in
a way that does not impede pedestrian traffic.
e. Parking should be screened from adjacent
structures with landscaping strips not exceed-
ing 4 feet in height in order to ensure pedes-
trian safety.
f. Lighting must be provided in parking areas
at night for safety purposes. However, direct
glare, spillover or other forms of light pollution
directed at adjacent properties are prohibited.
g. The installation of rain gardens within parking
areas is encouraged for storm water infiltration
purposes.
h. Parking facilities must be ADA compliant when
deemed necessary.
Delivery, Service, Storage and Utility Areas
Goal: To minimize the visual impact of storage and
utility areas within residential developments.
a. Exterior storage and utility areas should be
located in low trafficked areas and screened
from adjacent properties.
b. Trash enclosures should be located so that
noise and odor do not affect nearby residents
or adjacent properties.
c. Screening of storage and utility areas may in-
clude landscaping and architectural features
that match the primary structure.
d. Storage areas should match the architectural
design of the primary structure.
e. Utilize directional signage for storage and trash
areas when appropriate.
B. Building Design
Form and Facade
Goal: Standards are intended to ensure high qual-
ity design, encourage creativity and promote visu-
ally appealing development, thereby cultivating a
sense of place and identity.
a. No blank facades without windows and doors
are allowed. All sides of the structures shall
have architectural treatments.
b. Window and door styles should reflect the pre-
vailing architectural style of the structure.
c. Window sills and trim are required for all exte-
rior windows.
d. Flat panel exterior and garage doors are dis-
couraged.
e. Garages should be recessed from the facade
of the principal structure whenever possible to
draw visual attention away from parking areas.
f. If there are multiple garages within a struc-
ture, they should be varied in their location to
minimize the visual impact of a row of garage
doors.
Lighting should be down-cast and shielded to prevent glare
or spill-over onto adjacent properties.
Attached units on a public street benefit from individual
entries.
10 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
HIgH densIT y resIdenTIal developmenT
g. Detached garages shall be architecturally con-
sistent with the principal structure.
h. Finished exterior materials shall be applied
to all wall facades above 18 inches from the
finished grade line, where unfinished exterior
foundation may be visible.
i. Ground level of multi-family structures should
be distinguished architecturally from upper
levels to provide human-scale elements for pe-
destrians.
j. Living space below the main building level,
such as a walkout structure, may not be visible
from the front side of the structure facing the
main public street.
k. Split entry type structures are discouraged.
l. Where individual units face a public street,
each unit should be designed with a walkway
from the sidewalk to the front entry feature.
m. Entryways to individual units should contain an
entryway feature, such as a porch or portico.
Building Materials
Goal: To offer a variety of attractive and quality build-
ing materials that will shape the identity and visual
interest of residential development in Lake Elmo.
a. All structure facades should utilize multiple
building materials.
b. Changes in facade building materials should
occur at clean horizontal and vertical separa-
tions, such as at building levels or architectural
features.
c. Siding materials should emphasize horizontal lines
to reduce the appearance of height and mass.
d. Multiple facade colors are encouraged as long
as they are balanced and consistent.
e. Primary building materials for residential struc-
tures should include brick, finished wood,
stone, quality metals, glass, cast-stone, or pre-
cast concrete panels with aggregate, banding,
testuring, or other similar decorative finish.
f. Exposed exterior building materials such as
brick, stone, wood, or stucco should be au-
thentic. Simulated materials may also be used
if demonstrated to be of high quality and ap-
proved by the City.
g. Materials which are prohibited as the primary
facade material include the following:
• Vinyl siding
• Unpainted galvanized metal
• Corrugated metal, plastic, or fiberglass
• Plain, unpainted, or painted concrete
block
• Prefabricated concrete panels
h. Roofing materials should consist of composition
shingles, wood shakes, or clay or stone tiles.
Metal used as a roofing material must incorpo-
rate ribs or standing seams to be acceptable.
i. Samples of facade and roof materials must be
submitted to the City prior to the approval of
the building permit.
Scale and Mass
Goal: To establish parameters for building horizon-
tally and vertically with a human scale in mind.
a. Building volume should be broken up with re-
cesses and projections such as balconies, bay
windows, dormers, porches, and other features
that provide variation and identity.
b. Mass should be reduced through facade artic-
ulation, breaking up the wall area into smaller
sections.
c. Architectural elements, such as dormers, deco-
rative windows and trim, porch details, decora-
tive shutters, and wainscoting, can reduce the
appearance of bulk and mass by providing vi-
sual interest.
d. Building mass should be broken up with mul-
tiple roof and ridgelines perpendicular with one
another.
e. Structures of two-stories or higher should have
articulated facades to minimize the appear-
ance of mass, as well as multiple roof lines
with corresponding gables.
f. Scale should be reduced by utilizing “step-
down” methods towards the public street.
Porches, entries, window-bays or bump-out are
effective in this regard.
Building Mass is reduced by breaking the building up into
smaller sections and “stepping-back” levels above the
ground floor. Source: www.minnpost.com
11City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
HIgH densIT y resIdenTIal developmenT
Roof Design
Goal: To break up monotonous roof lines, add ar-
chitectural detail and screen rooftop equipment.
a. All rooftop equipment and must be screened
using materials consistent with the overall ar-
chitecture, particularly on roofs that are visible
from adjacent buildings.
b. Multiple peaks and ridgelines are encouraged
to promote greater visual interest.
c. Dormers are encouraged to break up continu-
ous rooftop.
d. Providing architectural detail on soffits and fas-
cias are encouraged.
Entries
Goal: To encourage entryways of high architectural
quality that emphasize access, safety, and a hu-
man scale.
a. Primary building entries shall be visible and
connected to the street sidewalk by the most
direct route practical. However, some cur-
vature in design for aesthetic purposes is al-
lowed.
b. Each building should have one or more clear-
ly identifiable “front doors” that address the
street and include signage denoting property
address.
c. Building entries should incorporate design ele-
ments or architectural treatments, such as aw-
nings, columns or cornices to emphasize the
primary entryway.
d. Primary communal entryways are encouraged
to be recessed to offer shelter from inclement
weather. Units with individual exterior entries
are encouraged to include porches, covered
recesses or covered stoops.
e. Ground floor residences that adjoin a public
street or open space shall have direct access
to the public street or open space.
f. For units with individual exterior entries, small,
landscaped private entry yards afford an at-
tractive appearance on the street side and al-
low residents to take pride in these areas.
Lighting
Goal: To provide for safety and visual interest,
while respecting the City’s dark sky ordinance.
a. Lighting should be provided in all common ar-
eas, including parking, vehicular and pedes-
trian entries, walkways and common facilities
(mailboxes, pools, etc.).
b. Lighting height shall be consistent with the
City’s exterior lighting standards.
c. Service area lighting shall be confined within the
service yard boundaries and enclosure walls.
d. Spill-over light from storage or service areas
is not allowed. Lights at service or exit doors
shall be limited to low wattage, downcast or
low cut-off fixtures that remain on throughout
the night.
e. Accent lighting should be used to draw interest
to architectural features or entryways and not
to exhibit or advertise buildings. Architectural
lighting must be downcast and shielded to pre-
vent light pollution.
f. Bare bulb or exposed neon lighting is not al-
lowed for accentuating building form.
Signage
Goal: Residential signage should be subtle in na-
ture and utilized to promote building identity and to
properly direct automobile and pedestrian traffic.
a. Signs shall be consistent with the architectural
style of the building on which they are placed, in-
cluding scale, lighting levels, color and material.
b. Signs shall be constructed of quality materials.
c. All signage should be illuminated and clearly
visible after dark.
d. Signs are encouraged to be creative in the use
of two and three-dimensional forms, lighting
and graphic design, and use of color, patterns,
typography, and materials.
e. Interior vehicle and pedestrian routes should
be clearly marked.
f. All buildings are encouraged to incorporate el-
ements of community theming in appropriate
signage, supporting district and city identity.
12 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
This page left blank intentionally.
13City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
ParkingCommercial Development3
The future commercial areas within the I-94 Corri-
dor and Old Village will include a variety of service,
office, retail and other uses that will serve exist-
ing and future Lake Elmo residents and beyond.
While the differences in character and geography
of these two growth areas may attract different
types of commercial uses, it is important to es-
tablish standards that will ensure quality devel-
opment outcomes regardless of location and use
classification. In the commercial districts, quality
development outcomes consist of buildings of high
architectural quality and sites that function well for
all users, both drivers and pedestrians.
A. Site Design
Building Placement
Goal: To ensure access and circulation for all us-
ers in a manner that minimizes traffic disruption
and safety concerns, as well as maintains good
sightlines from the public street.
a. Buildings must be setback at least 30 feet
from the public right of way. Buildings are en-
couraged to be located as close to the public
street as possible while still meeting the set-
back requirement.
b. The orientation of multiple buildings on one
site must be clearly coordinated.
c. Buildings should be oriented parallel or per-
pendicular to the street they front, promoting
continuity of design.
d. Buildings should be arranged to provide conve-
nient access to entrances and efficient on-site
circulation for vehicles and pedestrians.
e. Shared access points from the public ROW are
encouraged. Vehicular access points should be
limited to minimize traffic disruption.
f. For master planned development, the provi-
sion of landscaped open or gathering spaces is
encouraged within commercial developments.
Applicable Zoning Districts:
• Commercial (C) • Convenience Commercial (CC)
Landscaped gathering spaces provide a distinctive and welcoming space for visitors.
14 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
CommerCIal developmenT
Streetscape
Goal: To create safe, pleasant and functional pe-
destrian spaces within commercial development,
improving access and district identity.
a. Sidewalks are required along primary street
frontages, unless a suitable alternative that
promotes pedestrian access safety is approved.
In addition, pedestrian access to the building
from the public street shall be provided.
b. Street trees shall be installed at regular inter-
vals along the public right of way.
c. Ornamental or bollard lighting is encouraged to
increase safety, as well as add visual interest.
d. Fencing shall be installed around outdoor din-
ing areas that are adjacent to pedestrian areas
or streets.
e. Site furnishings such as decorative fencing,
trash receptacles, planters, bicycle racks, and
benches are recommended. Applicants are
encouraged to utilize design elements and
site amenities from the Lake Elmo Branding &
Theming Study.
Landscaping
Goal: To ensure development of a high aesthetic
quality, and to reduce the amount of impervious
surface at commercial sites.
a. Parking, public and streetscape areas should
utilize trees, plant beds, and potted plants to
add visual interest and break up continuous
hardscape.
b. Parking, service, storage and utility areas
should be buffered by plantings. Near areas
of pedestrian circulation, these plantings shall
not exceed 4 feet in height for safety purposes.
c. Hardy and native plant materials that are re-
sistant to the climate, disease and salt are en-
couraged.
d. Making use of similar plant materials as adja-
cent properties and public spaces is encour-
aged to create continuity.
e. Mature trees located on building sites should
be retained whenever possible.
f. Bare soils should be planted or mulched with
bark, stone or other suitable material to avoid
unnecessary runoff.
g. The installation of rain gardens is encouraged
to increase on-site
storm water infiltra-
tion, particularly in
parking areas.
Parking
Goal: To provide parking
facilities that adequately
serve the needs of com-
mercial properties, while
ensuring pedestrian safe-
ty and maintaining a posi-
tive visual aesthetic from
the public right of way.
Streetscapes should include plant beds with trees to provide
shade and add aesthetic value along sidewalks.
Sidewalks within larger
parking lots improve
pedestrian circulation and
safety.
Fencing around outdoor dining areas helps delineate pedes-
trian walkways and patio space.
Bollards are an effective tool in delineating the pedstrian
space. This style of bollard is drawn from the Lake Elmo
Branding and Theming Study.
15City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
CommerCIal developmenT
a. The linear measurement of surface parking ar-
eas parallel to the public street may not exceed
more than 60% of primary street frontages.
Sites or projects that are unable to meet this
requirement will be required to install berms
and/or additional landscaping along areas of
surface parking adjacent to the primary street
frontage.
b. The entrance to parking facilities should be lo-
cated on secondary streets when possible.
c. Shared parking facilities between adjacent
uses or businesses are strongly encouraged
when possible to avoid excessive amounts of
parking.
d. Structure parking is encouraged, and should
be located behind or beneath primary build-
ings when possible.
e. Structure parking or parking areas located be-
neath the primary structure should be screened
with architectural elements that match the pri-
mary building.
f. Parking areas should be screened from view
of public streets by means of grading and/or
landscaping.
g. Parking areas should be screened from adja-
cent structures with landscaping strips not ex-
ceeding 4 feet in height in order to ensure pe-
destrian safety.
h. Landscaped islands should be installed within
surface parking areas to break up continuous
hardscape and reduce concentration of imper-
vious surface.
i. The installation of rain gardens within parking
areas is encouraged for storm water infiltration
purposes.
j. Lighting must be provided in parking areas
at night for safety purposes. However, direct
glare, spillover or other forms of light pollution
directed at adjacent properties are prohibited.
k. Parking facilities must be ADA compliant when
deemed necessary.
Delivery, Service, Storage and Utility Areas
Goal: To provide physical and visual separation
between delivery, service and storage areas and
areas of pedestrian and automobile circulation.
a. Service, storage, maintenance or trash collec-
tion areas should be located out of the view
from the public right of way, or significantly
screened through landscaping or architectural
features.
b. Service, storage and trash collection areas are
not allowed in the setback areas.
c. The location of delivery, storage and service ar-
eas should be clearly marked with signage and
should not interfere with other automobile or
pedestrian circulation.
d. Storage and delivery areas should be hard sur-
face, minimizing the dispersal of dust.
B. Building Design
Form and Facade
Goal: To ensure structures of high architectural
quality that promote visual interest, thereby sup-
porting district identity.
a. No blank facades without windows and doors
are allowed. All sides of structures should have
architectural treamtent.Variety and creativity in
building facade is encouraged through changes
in building materials, fenestration height, and
roof lines, especially on primary facades that
face the public right of way.
Landscaping strips along public streets add a visual separa-
tion between parking areas and the public right-of-way.
Facade articulation and windows with architectural detail
add visual interest and break up long expanses of continu-
ous façade.
16 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
CommerCIal developmenT
b. Window and door styles shall reflect the pre-
vailing architectural style of the structure.
c. Ground level retail and commercial uses
should employ a significant amount of trans-
parent glass in the form of windows and doors,
particularly near pedestrian entrances.
d. Minimizing continuous expanses of wall
through facade articulation, recession and pro-
jection is encouraged.
e. Structures that are oriented towards the public
street are encouraged to provide multiple ac-
cess points or entrances if the parking area is
located to the rear of the structure.
f. Architects and builders are encouraged to in-
corporate topographical features into the form
of the structure when possible, utilizing natural
grades to create unique design.
Building Materials
Goal: To promote quality development through du-
rability and visual aesthetics, thereby supporting
district identity.
a. High-quality and durable materials should be
used in street facing facades.
b. Primary building materials for commercial
structures should include brick, finished wood,
stone, cast stone, or pre-cast concrete panels
with exposed aggregate, banding, texturing, or
other similar decorative finish treatment.
c. High quality synthetic materials that adequate-
ly duplicate natural materials may be accept-
able if approved by the City.
d. The following building materials are not allowed
to be used as the primary facade for commer-
cial development:
• Unpainted galvanized metal
• Unfinished “green-treated” lumber
• Unfinished wood
• Plain or unpainted concrete
• Cast-in-place concrete
• “Tilt-up” concrete panels
• Painted concrete block may be used on
the rear of the building or sides not visible
from the public right of way.
e. Facade colors should reflect subtle earth
tones. However, other primary facade colors
will be considered by the Review Authority. Ac-
cent materials should complement the colors
of the primary facade.
f. Samples of facade and roof materials shall be
submitted to the City prior to the approval of
the building permit.
Scale and Mass
Goal: To establish standards for building with a hu-
man scale in mind.
a. Buildings should be broken down into smaller
parts to avoid monotonous or continuous de-
sign and the appearance of mass.
b. Exterior design that provides the appearance
of multiple structures is encouraged to reduce
scale and minimize mass.
c. Building mass should be broken up with mul-
tiple roof and ridgelines perpendicular with one
another.
d. Structures of two-stories or higher should have
Parapets of varying heights add architectural interest and
accentuate building entries.
High quality and durable building materials add aesthetic
value and create a more attractive environment.
17City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
CommerCIal developmenT
articulated facades to minimize the appear-
ance of mass, as well as multiple roof lines
with corresponding gables.
e. Scale should be reduced by utilizing “step-
down” methods towards the public street. En-
tries and other bump out features are effective
in this regard.
Roof Design
Goal: To ensure architectural consideration and
consistency in roof design in relation to the struc-
ture, and to reduce the visual impact of rooftop
equipment.
a. The design of the roof must be consistent with
the overall architecture or design of the structure.
b. Parapets of varying heights are required for
large commercial buildings with flat roofs.
c. Rooftop equipment, particularly on flat roofs,
must be screened by the parapet or other ar-
chitectural features.
Entries
Goal: To provide identifiable entryways that em-
phasize access, pedestrian safety, architectural
quality and a human scale.
a. Entryways to commercial structures should be
accessible for pedestrians from the public right
of way. Large retail sites in particular should
consider installing a dedicated pedestrian way.
b. Architectural features should be incorporated
into entryways, such as facade detailing or
prominent windows.
c. The use of canopies, awnings and other shel-
tering features are encouraged.
d. Pedestrian amenities such as trash recepta-
cles, benches, or lighted bollards are encour-
aged near entryways to commercial buildings.
Lighting
Goal: To ensure safety of patrons, employees, pe-
destrians and automobiles, as well as providing
visual interest and aesthetic value to a site, while
limiting light polution of the night sky to the best
extent possible.
a. Lighting must be provided in entryways, park-
ing areas, pedestrian ways, storage and ser-
vice areas, and other locations that require ad-
ditional safety lighting.
b. Lighting height shall be consistent with the
City’s exterior lighting standards.
c. Lighting styles should be complementary to
the architectural style of the building.
d. Lighting of architectural features should be
used to provide accent and interest, as well
as identify the building entryway. Architectural
lighting must be downcast and shielded to pre-
vent light pollution.
e. Bollard lighting is encouraged for pedestrian
areas.
f. Overhead lighting must be shielded to prevent
light trespass and spill-over onto adjacent
properties.
g. Commercial uses near residential zones must
utilize lighting that minimizes light trespass.
h. Bare bulb and exposed neon lighting are not
allowed.
Signage
Goal: To provide signage that clearly identifies
businesses within the Commercial district, while
promoting quality and consistency in terms of de-
sign and materials.
a. Building signage should be complementary
to the architecture of the structure, as well as
consistent with the style of the surrounding
buildings or district.
b. Sign elements that will be evaluated for consis-
tency include scale, color, lighting and materi-
als.
c. Signs must be constructed of high-quality, du-
rable materials.
d. Directional signage to delivery, service and
storage areas is required.
e. Two and three-dimensional signs are encour-
aged to promote creativity and district identity.
f. All buildings are encouraged to incorporate el-
ements of community theming in appropriate
signage, supporting district and city identity.
Signage should complement the architectural style of the
building.
18 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
This page left blank intentionally.
19City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
Business Park Development4
The intent of this zoning district is to provide oppor-
tunities for high quality business park development
for office, light manufacturing, and other non-retail
uses. In terms of design, this manual establishes
consistent architectural standards between vari-
ous users in the BP district. These architectural
standards are intended to promote a coordinated
identity and avoid mismatched design. In addition,
the manual ensures the installation of open-space
character within business park development
through effective site design and landscaping.
A. Site Design
Building Placement
Goal: To establish standards for building location
that ensure effective automobile and pedestrian
circulation and promote coordination of buildings
between adjacent sites and structures.
a. Buildings must be setback at least 50 feet
from the public right of way.
b. Buildings should be located in a manner that
allows for effective automobile and pedestrian
circulation.
c. Shared access points from the public ROW are
encouraged. Vehicular access points should be
limited to minimize traffic disruption.
d. The orientation of buildings should be compat-
ible with adjacent structures and sites.
e. Utilizing the natural topography or features of
the site is encouraged to create unique land-
scapes and add visual interest and value to the
design.
f. The provision of common and open spaces to
the rear of the site is encouraged for the use
of employees and visitors, reinforcing Lake El-
mo’s open-space character.
Streetscape
Goal: To provide high quality landscaping in areas
visible from the public view, as well as promote pe-
destrian connections in the BP district.
a. Street trees shall be installed at regular inter-
vals along the public right of way. Species of
street trees should be selected according to
root zone and salt tolerance.
b. Additional landscaping along public streets is
encouraged. Landscape materials should be low-
maintenance and native to ensure heartiness.
c. Sidewalks along the public right of way are
encouraged to extend pedestrian connections
throughout the BP district.
d. Utilizing site amenities as guided by Lake Elmo
Theming Study is encouraged.
Applicable Zoning Districts:
• Business Park/Light Manufacturing (BP)
Utilizing natural topography within business park develop-
ment adds aesthetic value and reinforces Lake Elmo’s open
space character.
Street trees provide an attractive streetscape, as well as help
screen and provide shade within parking areas.
20 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
busIness park developmenT
Landscaping
Goal: To reduce continuous hardscape and imper-
vious surface, as well as ensure development of a
high visual quality.
a. Trees, plant beds, and potted plants should
be installed in parking, sidewalk, and other
hard surfaced areas to add visual interest and
break up continuous impervious surface.
b. Parking, service, storage and utility areas
should be buffered by plantings, particularly
when in view of public streets. Near areas of
pedestrian circulation, these plantings shall
not exceed 4 feet in height for safety purposes.
c. Hardy and native plant materials that are re-
sistant to the climate, disease and salt are en-
couraged.
d. Making use of similar plant materials as adja-
cent properties and public spaces is encour-
aged to create continuity.
e. Mature trees located on building sites should
be retained whenever possible.
f. Bare soils should be planted or mulched with
bark, stone or other suitable material to avoid
unnecessary runoff.
g. The installation of rain gardens is encouraged
to increase on-site storm water infiltration, par-
ticularly in parking areas.
Parking
Goal: To adequately serve the parking needs of
businesses in the BP district, while ensuring pe-
destrian safety, reduced impervious surface, and
a high quality visual aesthetic and appearance.
a. The linear measurement of surface parking ar-
eas parallel to the public street may not exceed
more than 75% of primary street frontages.
Sites or projects that are unable to meet this
requirement will be required to install berms
and/or additional landscaping to buffer areas
of surface parking adjacent to the primary
street frontage.
b. The entrance to parking facilities should be lo-
cated on secondary streets when possible.
c. Shared parking facilities between adjacent
uses or businesses are strongly encouraged
when possible to avoid excessive amounts of
parking.
d. Structure parking is encouraged, and should
be located behind or beneath primary build-
ings when possible.
e. Structure parking or parking areas located be-
neath the primary structure should be screened
with architectural elements that match the pri-
mary building.
f. Parking areas should be screened from view
of public streets by means of grading and/or
landscaping.
g. Parking areas should be screened from ad-
jacent structures with landscaping strips not
exceeding 4 feet in height in order to ensure
pedestrian safety.
h. Landscaped islands should be installed within
surface parking areas to break up continuous
hardscape and reduce concentration of imper-
vious surface.
i. The installation of rain gardens within parking
areas is encouraged for storm water infiltration
purposes.
j. Lighting must be provided in parking areas
at night for safety purposes. However, direct
glare, spillover or other forms of light pollution
directed at adjacent properties are prohibited.
k. Parking facilities must be ADA compliant when
deemed necessary.
Delivery, Service, Storage and Utility Areas
Goal: To provide physical and visual separation of
delivery, service, storage and utility areas from the
public right of way and areas of automobile and
pedestrian circulation.
Landscape islands greatly improve that character of surface
parking lots.
21City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
busIness park developmenT
a. Delivery, service, storage, maintenance or trash
collection areas should be located out of the
view from the public right of way, or significantly
screened through landscaping or architectural
features that match the primary structure.
b. Service, storage and trash collection areas are
not allowed in the setback areas.
c. The location of delivery, storage and service ar-
eas should be clearly marked with signage and
should not interfere with other automobile or
pedestrian circulation.
d. Storage and delivery areas should be hard sur-
face, minimizing the dispersal of dust.
B. Building Design
Form and Facade
Goal: To promote buildings of high architectural
quality and creativity in design.
a. No blank facades without windows and doors
are allowed. All sides of the structures should
have architectural treatments.
b. Window and door styles should reflect the pre-
vailing architectural style of the structure.
c. Variety and creativity in building facade is en-
couraged through changes in building materi-
als, fenestration height, and roof lines. Primary
facades should not present a continuous wall
without architectural details that add visual in-
terest.
d. Minimizing continuous expanses of wall
through facade articulation, recession or pro-
jection is encouraged.
e. Architects and builders are encouraged to incor-
porate topographical features into the form of
the structure when possible, utilizing natural
grades to create unique design.
Building Materials
Goal: To promote quality development through du-
rability and visual aesthetics, thereby supporting
district identity.
a. High-quality and durable materials should be
used in street facing facades.
b. Primary building materials for structures in the
BP district should include brick, stone, cast
stone, quality metals, glass, Exterior Insulation
Finish Systems (EFIS), or pre-cast concrete
panels with exposed aggregate, banding, tex-
turing or other similar decorative finish treat-
ment.
c. Synthetic materials that adequately duplicate
natural materials may be acceptable.
d. The following building materials are not al-
lowed to be used as primary finished facade
material for business park development:
• Unpainted galvanized metal
•
Garbage collection areas should be located to the rear of the
site and screened using materials that match the principal
structure.
Corner treatments to larger structures add visual interest
and break up monotonous design.
Long expanses of wall can be broken up using windows and
other treatments.
22 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
busIness park developmenT
Unfinished “green-treated” lumber
• Unfinished wood
• Plain or unpainted concrete
• Cast-in-place concrete
• “Tilt-up” concrete panels
• Painted concrete block may be used on
the rear of the building or sides not visible
from the public right of way.
g. Facade colors should reflect subtle earth
tones. However, other primary facade colors
will be considered by the Review Authority. Ac-
cent materials shall complement the colors of
the primary facade.
h. Samples of facade and roof materials should
be submitted to the City prior to the approval of
the building permit.
Scale and Mass
Goal: To reduce the appearance of mass in the BP
district.
a. Scale should be reduced by utilizing “step-
down” methods, particularly near areas of pe-
destrian circulation. Entries and other bump
out features are effective in this regard.
b. Structures of two-stories or higher should uti-
lize facade treatments, such as multiple build-
ing materials or additional windows, to mini-
mize the appearance of mass.
Roof Design
Goal: To ensure architectural consideration and
consistency in roof design in relation to the archi-
tecture of the building, and to reduce the visual
impact of rooftop equipment.
a. The design of the roof must be consistent with
the overall architecture or design of the struc-
ture.
b. Parapets of varying heights are required for
buildings in the BP district with flat roofs.
c. Rooftop equipment, particularly on flat roofs,
must be screened by the parapet or other ar-
chitectural features.
Entries
Goal: To provide identifiable entryways that em-
phasize access, pedestrian safety, architectural
quality and a human scale.
Parapets of varying height provide additional architectural detail that add aesthetic value.
High quality building materials are required for street-facing
facades.
23City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
busIness park developmenT
a. Entryways to buildings in the BP district should
be accessible for pedestrians from the public
right of way.
b. Architectural features should be incorporated
into entryways, such as facade detailing or
prominent windows.
c. The use of canopies, awnings and other shel-
tering features are encouraged.
d. Pedestrian amenities such as ornamental
trash receptacles, benches or lighted bollards
are encouraged near entryways to buildings in
the BP district.
Lighting
Goal: To ensure safety of patrons, employees, pe-
destrians and automobiles, as well as providing
visual interest and aesthetic value to a site, while
limiting light pollution of the night sky to the best
extent possible.
a. Lighting must be provided in entryways, park-
ing areas, pedestrian ways, storage and ser-
vice areas, and other locations that require ad-
ditional safety lighting.
b. Lighting height shall be consistent with City’s
exterior lighting standards.
c. Lighting styles should be complementary to
the architectural style of the building.
d. Lighting of architectural features should be
used to provide accent and interest, as well
as identify the building entryway. Architectural
lighting must be downcast and shielded to pre-
vent light pollution.
e. Bollard lighting is encouraged for pedestrian
areas.
f. Overhead lighting must be shielded to prevent
light trespass and spill-over onto adjacent
properties.
g. Buildings near residential zones must utilize
lighting that minimizes light trespass.
h. Bare bulb and exposed neon lighting are not
allowed.
Signage
Goal: To provide signage that clearly identifies
businesses within the BP district, while promoting
quality and consistency in terms of design and ma-
terials.
a. Building signage shall be complementary to
the architecture of the structure, as well as
consistent with the style of the surrounding
buildings or district as a whole.
b. Sign elements that will be evaluated for consis-
tency include scale, color, lighting and materi-
als.
c. Signs must be constructed of high quality, du-
rable materials.
d. Directional signage to delivery, service and
storage areas is required.
e. Two and three-dimensional signs are encour-
aged to promote creativity and district identity.
f. All buildings are encouraged to incorporate el-
ements of community theming in appropriate
signage, supporting district and city identity.
Canopies accentuate entryways and provide additional detail
and character.
Two and three-dimensional signage provides creativity and
visual interest.
24 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
This page left blank intentionally.
25City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
Mixed-Use Development5
The Village Mixed-Use district is expected to de-
velop as an extension of Lake Elmo’s historic
downtown area on Lake Elmo Ave. south of State
Highway 5. The downtown area of Lake Elmo rep-
resents quintessential small-town charm. It is the
City’s goal to build off this old, small-town charac-
ter to the best extent possible. The standards of
the Mixed-Use district place a high emphasis on
walkability, streetscapes, and the overall pedestri-
an environment. For this district to be successful,
site design must be conducive to pedestrian cir-
culation and safety. In addition, the development
that occurs in the Mixed-Use district will serve an
important function as a unique gathering place
in the community. For that reason, it is critical to
establish consistent and high quality architectural
standards that ensure creativity and an attractive
aesthetic.
A. Site Design
Building Placement
Goal: To promote compact development that is
consistent with Lake Elmo’s vision for a pedestri-
an-oriented downtown.
a. Buildings in the Mixed-Use district may meet a
zero lot line setback, but may not be setback
further than 20 feet from the public right of way.
b. If buildings do not meet a zero lot line orienta-
tion, plazas, patios, outdoor dining areas and
landscaped entries are encouraged in the set-
back area.
c. Buildings must be oriented either perpendicu-
lar or parallel to the street they front, with the
primary facade being parallel to the sidewalk.
d. Gaps and openings between buildings should
be minimized in order to preserve a compact
pedestrian environment.
e. Off-street parking areas should be located to
the rear or side of buildings in the Mixed-Use
district and accessed from secondary streets or
parking alleys. On-street parking may be avail-
able on public streets in the front of buildings.
f. Ground floor uses of structures in the Mixed-Use
district should encourage pedestrian activity.
Streetscape
Goal: To provide a pleasing pedestrian environ-
ment that promotes a vibrant and walkable down-
town area.
a. Sidewalks are required parallel to public streets
in the Mixed-Use district. Larger sidewalks are
encouraged to support the amount of pedes-
trian activity that is conducive to downtown
areas. The minimum sidewalk width in the
Mixed-Use district is 6 feet.
b. Sidewalk materials should be attractive, du-
rable and low-maintenance, such as concrete
and pavers. Special paving materials are en-
couraged to add visual interest and promote a
unique identity.
c. Pedestrian space may be maximized through
the use of perme-
able pavers or tree
grates at the base of
street trees.
d. Street or boulevard
trees should be
planted at regular
intervals. Species of
street trees should
be selected accord-
ing to root zone and
salt tolerance.
Applicable Zoning Districts:
• Village Mixed-Use
It is the goal of the mixed use development area to build off
of the existing charm of Downtown Lake Elmo.
Tree gates help maximize
pedestrian space in areas of
high pedestrian activity.
26 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
mIxed-use developmenT
e. Planting beds and other type of street land-
scaping are encouraged as long as they do not
conflict with pedestrian circulation.
f. Benches, bicycle racks, ornamental trash re-
ceptacles and other site furnishings are en-
couraged. Applicants are encouraged to utilize
design elements and site amenities from the
Lake Elmo Branding & Theming Study.
g. Pedestrian scaled lighting in the form of bollard
or ornamental lighting promotes district iden-
tity and pedestrian safety.
h. Ornamental fencing shall be installed around
outdoor dining areas to provide separation
from pedestrian routes.
Landscaping
Goal: To promote an aesthetically pleasing pedes-
trian environment through landscaping, as well as
reduce the amount of impervious surface in the
Mixed-Use district.
a. Parking, public and streetscape areas should
utilize trees, plant
beds, and potted
plants to add visual
interest and break
up continuous hard-
scape.
b. Parking, service,
storage and utility
areas should be buff-
ered by plantings.
Near areas of pe-
destrian circulation,
these plantings shall
not exceed 4 feet in
height for safety pur-
poses.
c. Hardy and native
plant materials that are resistant to the climate,
disease and salt are encouraged.
d. Making use of similar plant materials as adjacent
properties and public spaces is encouraged to
create continuity.
e. Mature trees should be retained when pos-
sible.
f. Bare soils should be planted or mulched with
bark, stone or other suitable material to avoid
unnecessary runoff.
g. The installation of rain gardens is encouraged
to increase on-site storm water infiltration, par-
ticularly in parking areas.
Parking
a. Off-street surface parking is not allowed in front
of the building along the primary street front-
age. However, opportunities for on-street park-
ing on the public street should be available.
b. Structured parking located to the side, rear
or beneath the building is encouraged in the
Mixed-Use district.
c. Structure parking should be screened with ar-
chitectural elements that match the primary
building.
d. The entrance to parking facilities should be lo-
cated on secondary streets when possible.
e. Shared parking facilities between adjacent
Bump-out areas provide greater opportunity for pedestrian
amenities, such as benches and trash receptacles.
Seasonal planters attract more
activity to mixed-use areas by
creating a pleasant pedestrian
space.
Angled parking promotes traditional main-street character
and provides a greater buffer between pedestrian and auto-
mobile areas.
Parking is encouraged in the rear of the site to accentuate
front building elevations.
27City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
mIxed-use developmenT
uses or businesses are strongly encouraged
when possible to avoid excessive amounts of
parking.
f. Surface parking areas should be screened
from view of public streets by means of grading
and/or landscaping.
g. Landscaped islands should be installed within
surface parking areas to break up continuous
hardscape and reduce concentration of imper-
vious surface.
h. The installation of rain gardens within parking
areas is encouraged for storm water infiltration
purposes.
i. Lighting must be provided in parking areas
at night for safety purposes. However, direct
glare, spillover or other forms of light pollution
directed at adjacent properties are prohibited.
j. Parking facilities must be ADA compliant when
deemed necessary.
Delivery, Service, Storage and Utility Areas
Goal: To provide physical and visual separation
between delivery, service and storage areas and
areas of pedestrian circulation.
a. Service, storage, maintenance or trash collec-
tion areas should be located out of the view
from the public right of way, or significantly
screened through landscaping or architectural
features.
b. Delivery areas should be located in the rear of
the building whenever possible.
c. Service, storage and trash collection areas are
not allowed in the setback areas.
d. Delivery, service, storage, maintenance and
utilities should be located in a way that does
not interfere with pedestrian circulation.
e. These areas should be marked with directional
signage when appropriate.
f. Delivery, storage and trash collection areas
should be hard surface, minimizing the disper-
sal of dust.
B. Building Design
Form and Facade
Goal: To promote buildings of high architectural
quality and old-town character that are oriented to-
wards the primary street frontage and pedestrian
environment.
Canopies, windows, lighting and high-quality building materials all provide architectural detail at the pedestrian level.
Trash and utility areas should be located out of the view of
the right-of-way and screened using materials that match the
principal structure.
28 City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
mIxed-use developmenT
a. No blank facades without windows and doors
are allowed. All sides of the structures should
have architectural treatments.
b. Variety and creativity in building facade is en-
couraged through changes in building materi-
als, fenestration height, and roof lines.
c. Minimizing continuous expanses of wall
through facade articulation, recession or pro-
jection is encouraged.
d. Window and door styles should reflect the pre-
vailing architectural style of the structure.
e. Architecture should be conscious of the design
of surrounding structures and overall district
identity, including facade treatments, windows,
building materials and entries.
f. Buildings should be designed to provide hu-
man scale.
g. The highest level of architectural detail should
occur adjacent to areas of pedestrian activity.
h. Auto-oriented uses, such as garages, delivery
areas or bay should be oriented away from the
primary street frontage.
Building Materials
Goal: To promote quality development through du-
rability and visual aesthetics, thereby supporting
district identity.
a. High quality and durable materials should be
used on all facades.
b. Primary building materials for commercial struc-
tures should include brick, finished wood, glass,
stone, cast stone, or pre-cast concrete panels
with exposed aggregate, banding, texturing, or
other similar decorative finish treatment.
c. Synthetic materials that adequately duplicate
natural materials may be acceptable pending
approval of the City of Lake Elmo.
d. The following building materials are not al-
lowed to be used as the primary facade for de-
velopment in the Mixed-Use district:
• Unpainted galvanized metal
• Unfinished “green-treated” lumber
• Unfinished wood
• Concrete block (painted or unpainted)
• Cast-in-place concrete
• “Tilt-up” concrete panels
e. Facade colors should reflect muted earth
tones. However, other primary facade colors
will be considered by the Review Authority. Ac-
cent materials should complement the colors
of the primary facade.
f. Samples of facade and roof materials shall be
submitted to the City prior to building permit
approval.
Mass and Scale
Goal: To establish standards for building with a hu-
man scale in mind.
a. Buildings should be broken down into smaller
parts to avoid monotonous or continuous de-
sign and the appearance of mass.
b. Exterior design that provides the appearance
of multiple structures is encouraged to reduce
scale and minimize mass.
c. Scale should be reduced by utilizing “step-
down” methods towards the public street. En-
tries and other bump out features are effective
in this regard.
d. Structures of two-stories or higher should have
articulated facades to minimize the appear-
ance of mass.
e. Building mass should be broken up by multiple
roof and ridgelines perpendicular with one an-
other.
Roof Design
Goal: To encourage creativity and architectural
treatments in roof design, and to reduce the visual
impact of rooftop equipment.
Step-down techniques and variation in building materials help
reduce the scale of the building and accentuate the street/
pedestrian area.
Brick is a high quality material that is consistent with an old
downtown mixed-use area.
29City of Lake eLmo - Design stanDarDs - Draft 10-28-13
DRAFT
mIxed-use developmenT
a. The design of the roof must be consistent with
the overall architecture or design of the structure.
b. Creativity and variety in roof design is encour-
aged in the Mixed-Use district to support dis-
trict identity.
c. Flat roofs should include variation in parapet
height, materials, and architectural detailing to
avoid monotonous roof lines.
d. Rooftop equipment, particularly on flat roofs,
must be screened by the parapet or other ar-
chitectural features.
e. Rooftops that are visible from adjacent build-
ings should minimize the visual impact of roof-
top equipment and give consideration to roof-
top aesthetics.
Entries
Goal: To provide identifiable entryways that em-
phasize access, pedestrian safety, architectural
quality and a human scale.
a. Entryways must be provided on the side of the
building fronting the primary street.
b. Entryways should receive the highest level of
architectural treatments. This may include fa-
cade treatments, prominent windows or other
features.
c. The use of canopies, awnings and other shel-
tering features are encouraged.
d. Pedestrian amenities such as ornamental
trash receptacles, benches, bicycle racks or
lighted bollards are encouraged near entry-
ways of buildings in the Mixed-Use district.
Lighting
Goal: To ensure safety of patrons, employees, pe-
destrians and automobiles, as well as providing
visual interest and aesthetic value to a site, while
limiting light polution of the night sky to the best
extent possible.
a. Lighting must be provided in entryways, park-
ing areas, pedestrian ways, storage and ser-
vice areas, and other locations that require ad-
ditional safety lighting.
b. Lighting styles should be complementary to
the architectural style of the building and sur-
rounding district.
c. Lighting of architectural features should be
used to provide accent and interest, as well
as identify the building entryway. Architectural
lighting must be downcast and shielded to pre-
vent light pollution.
d. Bollard lighting is encouraged for pedestrian
areas.
e. Overhead lighting must be shielded to prevent
light trespass and spill-over onto adjacent
properties.
f. Bare bulb and exposed neon lighting are not
allowed.
Signage
Goal: To provide durable, quality signage that iden-
tifies businesses and supports district identity.
a. Building signage must be complementary to
the architecture of the structure, as well as
consistent with the style of the surrounding
buildings or district.
b. Sign elements that will be evaluated for consis-
tency include scale, color, lighting and materials.
c. Signs must be constructed of high-quality, du-
rable materials.
d. Directional signage to delivery, service and
storage areas is required.
e. Two and three-dimensional signs are encour-
aged to promote
creativity and dis-
trict identity.
f. All buildings are
encouraged to
incorporate ele-
ments of commu-
nity theming in ap-
propriate signage,
supporting district
and city identity.
Signage design should be complimentary to the materials of
the building.
Directional signage helps
facilitate good traffic circulation
and flow.
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 10/28/13
AGENDA ITEM: 5B – BUSINESS ITEM
CASE # 2013-036
ITEM: Rural Area Development Analysis and Discussion
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to conduct a review of the City’s rural development areas
as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. This matter is being brought before the Planning Commission
at the request of the City Council, which generally discussed the City’s rural development areas as
part of its retreat earlier this year. The Commission has also requested a broader discussion on this
topic in response to its own recent conversations concerning growth and development in these areas.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City-initiated action for discussion
Request: Review land use plans and policies concerning Rural Development Areas
History: The City revised its Comprehensive Plan for rural areas in the early-mid 1990’s
to allow for open space developments. The amendments from this time period
limited the use of the Residential Estates as a future land use and instead
encouraged any future development of land to be consistent with the City’s open
space regulations. The RAD-2 category was added to the Plan in 2005 in
response to Met Council growth directives.
Deadline for Action: None
Applicable Regulations: Comprehensive Plan – Chapter III: Land Use Plan
Zoning Ordinance – Article 9: Rural District Standards
REVIEW DETAILS
For the purposes of this review, Staff is suggesting that the Planning Commission’s review of the
City’s rural development areas focus on the following issues:
• The current plan for rural development areas and the history behind the development of this
plan.
• The most recent projections for growth and development for the rural portions of the
community.
• The application of the RAD and RAD-ALT (formerly RAD-2) land use designation, and
whether or not the City should make any changes to these categories.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
2
Earlier this year the City Council adopted two significant updates to the City’s Comprehensive Plan
that incorporated new land use plans for the Village and I-94 Corridor planning areas into the
document. While the focus of these updates was on the future sewer service areas, all of the existing
land use categories for the rural development areas were carried forward into the new Plan. A review
of the rural development areas is therefore a worthwhile exercise at this time since these the future
land use guidance for these areas has been left relatively unchanged since the last major
Comprehensive Plan amendment in 2005.
The City Council has also recently drafted a response to the preliminary 2040 Met Council forecast
for Lake Elmo that, if accepted, would reduce the City’s projections for population and household
numbers in 2040. As part of the proposed revisions requested by the City Council, the City’s 2040
population target would go from 24,000 to 18,000. This reduction would allow the City to plan for a
more moderate amount of growth and development within the rural portions of the community, while
keeping a moderate level of growth and development within the urban service areas that will be
needed to help pay for the required infrastructure improvements.
At this time, Staff does not recommend any changes to the Comprehensive Plan that would lower the
overall household and population projections until a final forecast for Lake Elmo is adopted by the
Metropolitan Council. This forecast is expected to be finalized sometime in the spring of 2014. The
Planning Commission may want to recommend any adjustments to the plan for rural development
areas based on the recent updates that focused the land use within the urban service areas.
BACKGROUND
The City of Lake Elmo’s land use plan has undergone significant changes since the City was
incorporated into its present form over 30 years ago. At that time, the City’s Comprehensive Plan
was essentially divided into two primary areas: the areas that had been developed and subdivided
prior to 1980 (i.e. the Tri-Lakes and Village areas) and the City’s agricultural and rural residential
development areas. As far back as the late 1970’s the City has maintained zoning regulations that
have established a minimum lot size of 10 acres in rural residential zones and 40 acres in agricultural
zones. Any developments with parcels smaller than 10 acres were mostly platted prior to 1979 under
either township regulations or a City ordinance that closely followed township requirements.
Beginning with the City’s adoption of the 1979 Zoning Ordinance, areas that contained existing
platted lots, with a few exceptions, were grouped into a single family zoning district with a minimum
lot size requirement of 1.5 acres (the former R-1 district). This minimum was based partially on the
need to provide adequate room for septic systems on these lots, even though many of the parcels in
these single family areas did not meet the lot size requirement. Parcels with less than the minimum
required area were, and are still, considered legal non-conforming lots. The expansion of the single
family R-1 district has been discouraged by the City’s more recent comprehensive plans.
Since the adoption of the 1979 zoning regulations, the City has adopted three significant land use
changes to regulate growth and development within the rural development areas. These major policy
updates have included the following:
• As part of the 1990 Comprehensive Plan update, the City adopted a goal to establish a new
zoning category for residential development with a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres per unit and
a maximum net density of 3 units per 10 acres. This led to the creation of the RE –
Residential Estates zoning district, which is still in place today. With subsequent
comprehensive plan amendments, the City has moved away from the designation of any new
land for RE development.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
3
• In 1996 the City adopted a Comprehensive Plan amendment to guide most of the remaining
rural and agricultural portions of the community for open space development. This led to the
creation of the Open Space regulations that have been in place since this time. When first
adopted, the open space requirements allowed up to 16 homes per 40 acres, but this was
subsequently revised to allow densities of 18 homes per 40 acres (or 0.45 units per acre).
With later plan amendments, the City categorized the areas guided for open space
development as “Rural Agricultural Density” or RAD. Within the RAD category, working
farms, alternative agricultural uses, and low density residential developments (10+ acre lots)
are allowed, with a specific notation that new development is allowed consistent with the
City’s open space regulations. This language has been in place since the 2005
Comprehensive Plan update.
• Without going into a detailed history of the City’s dispute with the Metropolitan Council, the
City agreed to accept new sewered development as part of a negotiated agreement with the
Met Council. Lake Elmo therefore undertook a major comprehensive plan revision in 2005
that identified two new growth areas within the community that will be serviced by public
sanitary sewer. One such area was located along the I-94 Corridor while the other included
existing and proposed development within the Village Planning area. The City did not
substantially alter the RAD land use category at this time, and left any land not previously
developed and located outside of the new sewered growth areas in the RAD category. Given
the new household and population forecasts that were adopted by the City in 2005, it was
determined that there would not be enough development in the RAD areas to accommodate
this growth; hence the RAD-2 land use category was created to allow additional development
in limited locations at a density of two units per acre.
For the most part, the City’s development standards within rural development areas (classified as
RAD current Comprehensive Plan) have not been substantially revised since the open space zoning
approach was adopted. Some areas were removed from this category to provide room for sewered
development, and a few select parcels have been moved into the RAD-2 category. The City now has
18 open space developments located in all portions of the City, and there is room to accommodate
additional open space developments in the future.
The RAD-2 category is somewhat unique because it was not part of the original amendment that
created opportunities for open space development. The creation of the RAD-2 land use category was
done after a review by the City indicated that there was not enough developable land in the RAD
development areas to accommodate the number of rural households required to achieve the
population forecasts that came out of the City’s 2004 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with
the Met Council. After performing an analysis of the rural areas, it was decided that and additional
250-300 units of housing above and beyond the number that would be achieved under the existing
RAD densities would be needed to meet the requirements of the MOU. Two sites with a total
acreage of 142 acres were included in the RAD-2 category as part of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan
update on order to accommodate 284 additional units of housing within the rural development areas.
Since the adoption of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan update, the City has approved the required
decennial updates to the Plan in 2009 and further updated the land use and housing chapters to
accommodate refinements to the sewered growth areas. The City did not take any action to adopt
zoning regulations specific to the RAD-2 areas until it was presented with land use request to change
the RAD designation of a 24-acre parcel along Stillwater Boulevard from RAD to RAD-2. This
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
4
request, and the subsequent action taken by the City, are reviewed in greater detail a little later in this
memorandum.
GROWTH PROJECTIONS/DENSTY ALAYSIS
In preparation for discussions concerning proposed updates to the Comprehensive Plan in 2010, the
Planning Department conducted an analysis of the City’s rural development areas in order to better
understand the need to accommodate additional housing in these areas. The resulting report that was
presented to the City Council is attached for review by the Planning Commission. Please note that
since this information was assembled, the City has received its household and population numbers
from the 2010 Census, which shows a modest increase from the household numbers that Staff was
using at the time. Because these numbers are very close to one another and Staff was using the 2009
figure (instead of the 2010 census amount) the information cited below has not been updated.
Additionally, please keep in mind that the City Council ultimately adopted new population and
household growth forecasts as part of the recent land use plan amendments. The amendments do not
create the need to revise any of Staff analysis concerning rural areas from 2010 since the rural growth
projections were not impacted by the sewered land use changes.
To briefly summary the 2010 Staff analysis of rural development areas, please consider the
following:
• In 2009 there were estimated to be 2,814 households in Lake Elmo.
• By removing those existing households that will be connected to sewer in the future, Staff
estimated that the household count in the City’s RAD development areas was 2,120.
• The household projections included in the 2005 and 2013 Comp Plan updated show that
3,527 households will be located in the rural development areas in 2030.
• By subtracting existing housing units from the 2030 projection for rural areas, Staff
determined that 1,407 units would need to be built in rural development areas between 2010
and 2030 to achieve the population and household forecasts.
• A review of platter lots within the rural development areas in 2010 identified 148 vacant lots.
By removing these lots from the needed household count, Staff determined that the City
would need to allow for 1,259 additional units of housing in rural areas in order to achieve
the growth projections. Since no new rural development lots have been platted since 2010,
this number still represents an accurate accounting of needed future growth.
As part of this exercise, Staff researched the amount of land that is still available to accommodate the
1,259 housing units and studied three alternatives to accommodate this growth by either:
1) Assuming all development would follow current zoning requirements for rural
development areas, and specifically, the densities allowed under OP and RED zoning.
For this scenario, Staff only considered parcels larger than 40 acres as available for OP
developments since this is the current minimum area requirement. This was described a
conservative approach;
2) Keeping the above assumptions, but calculating potential development potential using a
20-acre minimum for OP developments. This would open up additional potential for OP
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
5
developments that could otherwise not be constructed under a 40-acre minimum
requirement. Staff referred to this scenario as a moderate growth strategy;
3) Taking a more aggressive approach with the assumptions form item (1) and projecting
that all parcels over 10 acres in size would be developed as part of an open space
development.
The result of this excise showed that the City could expect rural population growth of 1,070 units
using the conservative assumptions from above, 1,422 with a the more moderate approach, or 1,578
or more units with a very aggressive zoning approach. These results indicate that the conservative
(or status quo) approach would not allow the City to achieve its growth targets for 2030. Please note
that Staff did consider the areas currently guided for RAD-2 and RED in these calculations, and the
units projected for these areas are included in the numbers for each growth strategy. Expanding the
areas guided for RAD-2 would alter the above estimates by increasing the household totals
proportionate to the amount of land added to the RAD-2 category.
Since Staff completed this analysis, the City did proceed with updates to the Comprehensive Plan,
but did not make any changes to the areas outside of the urban services boundary. The City has also
recently received an updated Met Council forecast for population and household growth that is
substantially lower than the 24,000 currently referenced in the City’s planning documents and as
specified in the 2005 MOU. In order to respond in a timely manner to the preliminary Met Council
forecast, the City Council has developed a response that requests the following:
• 2040 population of 18,000 (reduced by 6,000)
• 2040 household count of 6,545 (reduced by 2,182)
• 2040 REC unit count of 5,000 (reduced by 1,600)
The Staff report to the City Council outlining a response to the Met Council forecasts is attached to
this document. Should these revised numbers be accepted by the Met Council, the City would be in a
position to reduce the growth projections within rural development areas to a more moderate level.
In this case, the Council has recommended reducing the portion of new households within rural areas
to 720 units, well below the current number of 1,407.
RAD AND RAD-ALT REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Prior to 2010, the City had only identified two potential sites for the RAD-2 land use category. In
early 2010, the City received an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan to add a new 24-acre
parcel into this future land use category in order to facilitate the a proposed development at 9442
Stillwater Boulevard North. The developer for this project proposed to construct a senior living
complex, townhouses, and a farm-based preschool on the site, but was not able to move forward
without a land use plan amendment. In addition, the City had not yet created zoning regulations that
corresponded to the RAD-2 designation; however, the applicant’s request included an amendment to
create a new OP-2 zoning district.
When this matter was brought before the Planning Commission for review, Staff did not recommend
approval of the proposed amendments for a number of reasons, citing 1) the lack of build out within
existing open space developments, 2) the lack of any substantial changes since the Comprehensive
Plan was adopted that would warrant the change, 3) language in the Comprehensive Plan that
encourages multi-family and senior development within sewer service areas, and 4) the
incompatibility of the propose land uses with the uses allowed in the City’s rural development areas.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
6
Based partly on positive feedback from residents in the community and a desire to move forward
with a unique project, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the land use and zoning
amendments, which were ultimately adopted the City Council. The City now has guided three
distinct areas for RAD-2 development (which was renamed RAD-ALT as part of the recent
amendments) including the property at 9442 Stillwater Boulevard North. These areas are currently
depicted on the City’s Future land use map (see Map 3-3 attached) and include:
• Approximately 36 acres located immediately north of 10th Street at the intersection of
Manning Avenue and 10th Street.
• Approximately 173 acres of land located northeast of the intersection of State Highway 5 and
Ideal Avenue close to the City’s western boundary with Oakdale.
• The 24 site at 9442 Stillwater Boulevard North
One of the key questions for the City as City moves forward with implementation of the
Comprehensive Plan is whether or not there should be an alternate land use category that allows for
increased development and land uses other than single family homes within the City’s rural
development areas. Based on the analysis presented above, the areas that have been guided for
RAD-ALT development will help the City achieve its growth targets; however, it does appear very
likely that the City will be receiving some form of relief from the 2005 population targets. Should
the revised projections be implemented, the original pressure that led to the creation of the RAD-2
category would likely go away.
In addition, there are other ways that the City can accommodate growth within rural areas, for
instance, by either increasing the allowed density in RAD areas (i.e. from 18 homes per 40 acres to
20 homes per 40 acres) or by allowing OP developments on parcels less than 40 acres. Another
option to add units within rural development areas would be to reduce the minimum lot size
requirements for A – Agriculture and RR – Rural Residential zoning districts, which are presently set
at 40 acres and 10 acres respectfully. The other relevant question that should be considered by the
Planning Commission is whether or not the City should be considering an expansion of the allowed
uses within rural development areas to accommodate things like senior housing and the provision of
goods and services for the community. The City Council has also asked that the Planning
Commission consider reducing the minimum lot size requirement within rural areas, and to
specifically consider allowing new residential construction on parcels of less than 10 acres.
Any of these, or similar, actions will have implications for how the City’s rural area will grow and
develop over the next 30 years and should be considered within the context of the City’s overall
goals and objectives. With the above comments in mind, please note the City’s overreaching mission
statement for land use planning as adopted by the Council which reads:
“To thoughtfully adopt a City-wide Comprehensive Plan that maintains the open space
character of the community while balancing attractive, sustainable growth opportunities that
meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Council.”
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (QUESTIONS)
Since this matter is being brought before the Planning Commission without a specific request or
recommendation, Staff would like to suggest that the Commission consider the following questions
as it considers the City’s land use planning in rural development areas:
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
7
• Should the minimum lot sizes in A and RR zoning districts be lowered in order to
accommodate increased opportunities for the use of larger parcels? Is 10 acres the optimal
number for preserving open space character?
• Does the City need to retain the RAD-ALT land use category, and should this land use be
eliminated if the proposed population forecasts are accepted by the Met Council?
• Would an increase in the types of allowed uses within rural development areas (i.e.
townhouses, senior housing, congregate housing, schools, community services, neighborhood
commercial) be consistent with the City’s stated goal of preserving open space character?
• Are the current uses allowed within rural areas appropriate? Is agriculture something that
should be more heavily encouraged by the City?
• Is the density allowed within OP developments acceptable or is it too high or too low? Have
the existing OP developments contributed towards or detracted from the City’s open space
character?
• The City’s land use plan does not allow for the expansion of RS – Rural Single Family or RE
– Residential Estates areas; these zoning districts have been restricted to existing
development only. Should new developments be allowed that are zoned in this manner?
In order to facilitate the Planning Commission discussion on these matters, or any others that might
be raised by the public of the Commission, Staff will spend time at the meeting reviewing the reports,
projections and land use plans that are referenced in this report and will present a more detailed
summary of the questions that are raised above. At this point, Staff is seeking general guidance from
the Commission, and will be presenting any specific direction from the meeting back to the City
Council.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the list of questions that have been
raised in the Staff report within the context of the information present in and attached this report.
Any specific recommendations should be made in the form of a motion.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Met Council Forecast Discussion – 10/15/13 Council Report
2. Rural Development Analysis – 7/6/10 Council Report
3. OP-2 Zoning Regulations
4. Lake Elmo Future Land Use Map (Map 3-3)
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ....................................................... Community Development Director
- Report by Staff .................................................. Community Development Director
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Public Coments ................................................................................................ Chair
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
8
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
Village
Land Use
Plan
Pending
Planning Commission
Date: 10/28/13
Item: 5c
Business Item
ITEM: Animal Ordinance Update
SUBMITTED BY: Adam Bell, City Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Beckie Gumatz, Deputy Clerk
______________________________________
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City of Lake Elmo has been working towards updating the City Code and making it
easier to understand. Staff has recently amended the Animals Chapter of the City Code
regarding cats, dogs, horses and dangerous animals. We are now looking at moving
Livestock from the Zoning Code to the Animals Chapter, amending the definition of a
Kennel, as well as adding sections on Chickens and Bees. Staff has now completed the
first draft of the document and is seeking input and feedback from the Planning
Commission.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
City Staff is currently working on updating the current Animals Chapter of the City
Code. As part of this update, city staff is looking to move the Livestock section from the
Zoning Code into the Animals Chapter. Staff also is proposing changes to the definition
of a private kennel. Staff would also like to add language to allow chickens and bees on
certain parcels in the City. There have been many requests and inquiries from the public
on whether or not the city allows these animals. There is also a growing trend of people
wanting to produce their own food. There are many communities around the metro area
that are starting to allow chickens and bees for this very reason. The proposed ordinance
for these updates will have eight sections and they are as follows:
• Removing Livestock section from the Zoning Code. Staff feels this would be
prudent because with the addition of Chickens and Bees as allowable animals on
smaller lots in the City of Lake Elmo, it will facilitate easier compliance by the
public and administration and enforcement by the City.
• Place and amend Livestock section in the Animals Chapter of the Code. Staff has
proposed changes to some of the animal units, as well as changing the amount of
acreage allowed to have livestock in the City of Lake Elmo. The main change that
has been made to the Livestock chapter is allowing domestic farm animals and
livestock on parcels of five acres or more. Previously, ten acres were required in
order to have domestic farm animals or livestock, with the exception of horses. In
BUSINESS ITEM 5c
2
accordance with this lowering of the amount of required parcel size, staff has also
made changes to the animal unit equivalents. They are detailed in a table in the
draft ordinance which is attached to this document. Language was also added to
clarify that animal units are cumulative. This means that no one is allowed to have
more than a density of one animal unit per two grazable acres.
• Amend the Kennel definitions section in the Zoning Code. Most of this language
was changed to establish consistency between the updates and existing city code.
Currently, the zoning definitions of commercial and private kennels conflicted
with the general definition of a kennel. The commercial kennel definition was
amended to require four or more dogs, cats or other domestic pets, rather than
two. This is to make it consistent with the animal ordinance that was adopted by
council on October 1. The private kennel definition was amended to apply to
dogs, cats, and other domestic pets rather than just applying to dogs. Language
was also added to this definition that states that it applies to parcels of land five
acres or greater and that the maximum number of animals allowed is six.
• Amending ‘General Businesses – Conditional Use’ Table in Section 154.051(A).
Language is added to clarify that only commercial kennels require a CUP.
• Amending Table 9.1: Permitted and Conditional Uses, Rural Districts, and
corresponding Development Standards section. These sections were amended to
allow private kennels and stables to be permitted uses in RT, A, and RR districts.
Language was also added to clarify that commercial kennels may not be located
on parcels less than 10 acres while accessory kennels and stables only require
parcels of 5 acres. This change is needed to comply with preexisting horse
regulations.
• Add clean up language to ‘Prohibition of Kennels’ and ‘Number of Dogs and Cats
Limited’ sections of Animal Code. This is merely clean up language. Based on
the changes made in section 3 regarding Kennels, updates were needed to the
Animal Code to maintain consistency. The language referencing kennel licenses
was removed, as the City will not be issuing kennel licenses.
• Add a section to the Animal Code regarding Keeping of Chickens. As stated
previously, the city has received quite a few inquiries about the rules regulating
the keeping of chickens in the city. After extensive research by staff of
surrounding and similar communities, staff is proposing adding a section the
Animal Code that would allow chickens in the City of Lake Elmo on parcels less
than ten acres. Roosters and crowing hens are strictly prohibited on parcels less
than five acres. Staff broke down the number of chickens allowed into three
different sections. First, a minimum of a half-acre is required for any property to
have any chickens. If you live on one half-acre to an acre of land you are allowed
four chickens. If you live on one acre to one and one-half acres you are allowed
eight chickens. The number goes up by eight chickens per half acre until you get
to three acres. Chickens on parcels of three to five acres are restricted to 0.02
BUSINESS ITEM 5c
3
animal units per acre. Chickens on parcels of more than five acres are restricted to
0.01 animal units per acre. The City also would require a permit for the keeping
of chickens on parcels of less than five acres. The first permit will be valid for up
to two years, with subsequent permits being valid from Jan 1 to Dec 1 of the same
year. The requirements for application and the permit conditions are detailed in
the proposed ordinance. Of note, Stillwater just recently passed an ordinance
allowing the keeping of chickens, which staff used as part of its research.
• Add a section to the Animal Code regarding Keeping of Bees. Staff also received
requests to allow bees to be kept in the city. Staff also researched similar and
surrounding communities when drafting the section of the ordinance that deals
with bees. Bees are not allowed on properties of less than one-half acre. The
ordinance also lays out how many colonies are allowed to be kept on parcel sizes.
Lots equal to or larger than one half acre up to three-fourths of an acre are
allowed four colonies. Lots larger than three-fourths of an acre up to one acre are
allowed six colonies, while lots one acre to five acres are allowed eight colonies.
There are no restrictions on lots which are larger than five acres in size. Permits
are also required for the keeping of bees in the city. The permits are valid for two
years. The ordinance also states that beekeeping training from a credible course is
required before any beekeeping permits will be issued. More information on the
bee section of the animal ordinance can be found in the attached ordinance. Of
note, Stillwater just recently passed an ordinance allowing the keeping of bees,
which staff used as part of its research.
Staff plans to bring this topic back to the Planning Commission to hold a Public Hearing
and seek a formal recommendation to remove the Livestock section from the Zoning
Code, as well as amending the Kennel sections of the Zoning Code.
RECCOMENDATION:
No formal action is requested at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. First Draft of Ordinance 08-0XX
2. Current Livestock Ordinance
3. Lot Size Analysis Map
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ...................................................................................Planning Staff
- Report by Staff .................................................................................... City Clerk
- Questions from the Commission ....................... Chair & Commission Members
- Discussion by the Commission ......................... Chair & Commission Members
BUSINESS ITEM 5c
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 08-0XX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE CONCERNING LIVESTOCK
AND KENNELS AND ALSO AMENDING THE ANIMALS CHAPTER OF THE
GENERAL REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land
Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, by repealing City Code Section 154.914 in its entirety.
SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title IX:
General Regulations; Chapter 95: Animals, by adding the following language:
ARTICLE IV. LIVESTOCK
§ 95.50 LIVESTOCK.
(A) Purpose. The purpose of the following sections are to promote and preserve the
natural resources within the City of Lake Elmo by regulating the keeping of livestock.
Erosion as a result of overgrazing and leeching of manure into groundwater have adverse
and potentially irreversible impacts on water quality and environmentally sensitive lands.
(B) (A) Prohibition of manure deposition without safeguards. No manure or
livestock waste shall be deposited, stored, kept, or allowed to remain upon any site without
reasonable safeguards adequate to prevent the escape or movement of the manure or wastes
or a solution of the manure or wastes from the site which may result in pollution of any
public waters or any health hazard.
(C) (B) Pollution Control Agency standard minimum requirement. All regulations
imposed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency relating to keeping of livestock shall
be adhered to and the regulations shall be considered the minimum safeguard necessary to
prevent pollution of public water or creation of a health hazard.
(D) (C) Inadequate safeguards. In case the Zoning Administrator shall find that any
manure is stored or kept on any lot or storage site without a safeguard, or that any existing
safeguard is inadequate, the Zoning Administrator may order the owner or other
responsible person to immediately remove the manure from the storage site and refrain
from further storage or keeping of any manure at the site unless and until an adequate
safeguard is provided.
(E) (D) Hazards and nuisances. On parcels of less than 40 acres which are not part
of a larger crop-producing commercial agricultural farm, the keeping of horses, cattle, or
other grazing animals on a site with less than 2 acres of existing grazable land per animal is,
by this section, declared to be a nuisance. Horses may be kept on any parcel larger than 5
acres. No domestic farm animals, or livestock, other than chickens or bees, or commercial
kennels shall be placed allowed on any site parcel of less than 10 5 acres. No commercial
kennels shall be placed on any site of less than 10 acres.
1
(F) (E) Grazable acres. Grazable acreage shall be defined as open, non-treed
acreage exclusive of the homesite and yard that is currently providing enough pasture or
other agricultural crops capable of supporting summer grazing at a density of 1 cow, or its
equivalent,animal unit per 2 acres. Grazable acreage shall not include non-jurisdictional
wetlands or slopes over 12%.
(G) (1) For purposes of these regulations, the following animal equivalents apply:
one slaughter steer, heifer or horse - 1.0; one mature dairy cow - 1.4; one swine over 55
pounds - .4; one sheep -.1; one turkey - .01; one chicken - .01; one duck - .02. The number
of permitted animals shall be determined by the following table:
TYPE OF ANIMAL ANIMAL UNITS
One slaughter steer, heifer, or mature
dairy cow
1.4
One horse, mule, donkey, llama, or alpaca 1.0
One hog/swine over 55lbs 0.5
One hog/swine under 55lbs 0.4
One sheep or goat 0.2
One turkey or goose 0.1
One duck or other fowl 0.04
One chicken, 3-5 acre parcels 0.02
One chicken, greater than 5 acres 0.01
(1) (2) For all other animals, the number of animal units shall be defined as the
average weight of the animal divided by 1,000 pounds.
(2) The number of animal units allowed per parcel is cumulative. The animal
density per parcel shall not exceed 1 animal unit equivalency per 2 grazable acres.
SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that Title XV:
Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, is hereby amended in the following manner:
§154.012(B)(3)(c) Commercial Kennel. The boarding, breeding, raising,
grooming or training of twofour or more dogs, cats, or other domestic pets of any age not
owned by the owner or occupant of the premises, and/or for commercial gain.
§154.012(B)(12)(f) Kennel, Private. The keeping, breeding, raising, showing or
training of 4 or more dogs, cats, or other domestic pets over six four months of age for
personal enjoyment of the owner or occupants of the property on parcels 5 acres or greater,
and for which commercial gain is not the primary objective. The maximum number of
animals allowed is 6.
SECTION 4. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that Title XV:
Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, is hereby amended in the following manner:
§ 154.051 GB – GENERAL BUSINESS.
(A) Permitted uses and structures.
2
(5) Uses permitted by conditional use permit.:
Commercial Kennels
SECTION 5. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that Title XV:
Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, is hereby amended in the following manner:
Table 9-1 is amended to read as follows:
§ 154.401 PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES.
Table 9.1: Permitted and Conditional Uses, Rural Districts
Accessory Uses
Kennel, Private CP CP CP - - 154.404.I
Stable, Private CP CP CP - - 154.404.I
§ 154.404 SITE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
I. Commercial Kennel, Commercial Stable, or Accessory Kennel or Stable, RT, A, RR
Districts. The commercial facility facilities shall occupy a site at least ten (10) acres in
size. Outdoor exercise areas shall be located at least 100 feet from adjacent properties;
landscaping or other screening may be required. Private kennels or stables shall be
allowed on sites at least five (5) acres in size.
SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that Title IX:
General Regulations; Chapter 95: Animals, is hereby amended in the following manner:
§ 95.05 Number of Dogs and Cats Limited
A. The keeping of a large number of dogs or cats poses health, safety and public
welfare risks and is deemed a public nuisance.
B. Cats. Unless the property owner holds a valid kennel license has an authorized
kennel, no individual or family unit living together, firm, or corporation shall keep
more than three (3) cats over the age of four (4) months on any parcel not zoned
RT, A, or RR.
C. Dogs. Unless the property owner holds a valid kennel license has an authorized
kennel, no individual or family unit living together, firm, or corporation shall keep
more than three (3) dogs over the age of four (4) months on any parcel not zoned
RT, A, or RR.
D. Cats and Dogs. Unless the property owner holds a valid kennel license has an
authorized kennel, no individual or family unit living together, firm, or corporation
shall keep more than a combination of three (3) cats and dogs over the age of four
(4) months on any parcel not zoned RT, A, or RR.
§ 95.10 Prohibition of Kennels; Private Kennels
3
A. No commercial kennels may be established in the city unless a special use
permit has been issued for the kennel as provided by the city ordinances
regulating land use.
B. An individual or family unit living together, firm, or corporation may keep a
private kennel consisting of a combination of no more than six (6) domestic
pets over the age of four (4) months on any parcel 5 acres or greater in size and
located in zoning districts RT, A, or RR.
Cross Reference: § 11.01 Definitions; §154.012 et seq. Zoning Use Types and
Classifications.
SECTION 7. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title IX:
General Regulations; Chapter 95: Animals, by adding the following language:
ARTICLE V. KEEPING OF CHICKENS
Sec. 95.60. Definitions
Sec. 95.61. Purpose
Sec. 95.62. Investigation and Enforcement
Sec. 95.63. Keeping of Chickens
Sec. 95.64. Permit Required; Term, Consent, Fee
Sec. 95.65. Application
Sec. 95.66. Permit Conditions
Sec. 95.67. Violations
Sec. 95.68. Issuance, Revocation
§ 95.60. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a
different meaning:
Brooding means the period of chicken growth when supplemental heat must be provided,
due to the bird’s inability to generate enough body heat.
Chicken means a domesticated bird that serves as a source of eggs or meat.
Coop means the structure for the keeping or housing of chickens permitted by the article.
Exercise yard means a larger fenced area that provides space for exercise and foraging for
the birds when supervised.
Hen means a female chicken.
Officer means any person designated by the city as an enforcement officer.
Rooster means a male chicken.
Run means a fully-enclosed and covered area attached to a coop where the chickens can
4
roam unsupervised.
§ 95.61. Purpose.
It is recognized that the ability to cultivate one’s own food is a sustainable activity that can
also be a rewarding pastime. Therefore, it is the purpose and intent of this article to permit
the keeping and maintenance of hens for egg and meat sources in a clean and sanitary
manner that is not a nuisance to or detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare of
the community.
§ 95.62. Investigation and Enforcement.
Officers designated by the city shall have authority in the investigation and enforcement
of this article, and no person shall interfere with, hinder or molest any such officer in the
exercise of such powers. The city shall make investigations as is necessary and may grant,
deny, or refuse to renew any application for permit, or terminate an existing permit under
this article.
§ 95.63. Keeping of Chickens.
A. Chickens on less than 3 acres.
Lot Size (acres) Chickens Allowed
0.00 – 0.49 0
0.50 – 0.99 4
1.00 – 1.49 8
1.50 – 1.99 16
2.00 – 2.49 24
2.50 – 2.99 32
B. Chickens on 3 – 5 acres.
Chickens maintained on parcels of 3-5 acres are restricted to 0.02 animal units per
acre. For reference, see “Animal Unit Equivalency” chart in Section 95.50.
C. Chickens on more than 5 acres.
Chickens maintained on parcels more than 5 acres are restricted to 0.01 animal units
per acre. A permit is not required for keeping chickens on a parcel size of more than 5
acres. For reference, see “Animal Unit Equivalency” chart in Section 95.50
§ 95.64. Permit Required; Term, Consent, Fee.
A. No person shall (without first obtaining a permit in writing from the City Clerk)
own, keep, harbor, or have custody of any live chicken on a lot less than five (5)
acres.
B. The first permit is valid for up to two (2) years beginning on the date of issuance
and ending on December 31 of the following year. Subsequent permits are valid
from January 1 to December 31.
5
C. Prior to issuance of a permit, notices must be mailed to all homes within 150
feet of the applicant’s property lines.
1. If there are objections received within ten days of mailing the
notices, then the permit application must be considered by the city
council.
2. If there are no objections received within ten days of mailing the
notices, then the permit application will be processed by city staff. It
will not be referred to the city council for consideration.
D. The fee for a permit may be imposed, set, established and fixed by the city
council, by ordinance, from time to time.
§ 95.65. Application.
Any person desiring a permit required under the provisions of this article shall make
written application to the city clerk upon a form prescribed by and containing such
information as required by the city. Among other things, the application shall contain the
following information:
1. A description of the real property upon which it is desired to keep the chickens.
2. The breed and number of chickens to be maintained on the premises.
3. A site plan of the property showing the location and size of the proposed
chicken coop and run, setbacks from the chicken coop to property lines and
surrounding buildings (including houses and buildings on adjacent lots), and the
location, type, and height of fencing proposed to contain the chickens in a run or
exercise area. Portable coops and cages are allowed, but portable locations must
be included with the site plan.
4. Statements that the applicant will at all times keep the chickens in accordance
with all of the conditions prescribed by the officer, or modification thereof, and
that failure to obey such conditions will constitute a violation of the provisions
of this article and grounds for cancellation of the permit.
5. Such other and further information as may be required by the officer.
§ 95.66. Permit Conditions.
Each person keeping chickens within the City of Lake Elmo shall comply with the
following:
1. No person may keep a rooster or crowing hen.
2. No person may allow chickens to range freely without fencing or without a
mobile pen.
3. No person may keep chickens inside the house or attached garage.
4. Chickens must be provided a secure and well ventilated roofed structure
(“chicken coop”)
5. The roofed structure and required fencing for the chickens may only be located
in a rear yard and must meet setback and building separations as established in
city zoning and building codes, except that the roofed structure and fencing
must maintain a 100 foot separation from dwellings on adjacent properties.
6
6. The roofed structure shall be fully enclosed, wind proof, and have sufficient
windows for natural light.
7. Chickens, coops, and/or runs shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute
a nuisance.
8. The chicken coop and run shall be kept in good repair as to be in compliance
with the property maintenance regulations elsewhere in the Code.
9. All chicken coops must have a minimum size of four (4) square feet per bird and
must be at least six (6) feet in height to allow access for cleaning and
maintenance.
10. Fenced in chicken runs must have a minimum of ten (10) square feet per bird
and must be at least six (6) feet in height to allow access for cleaning and
maintenance.
11. No chicken shall be allowed to roam freely without being within a completely
enclosed pen.
12. Butchering a chicken must not be in public view.
13. All butchering waste shall be disposed of in a sanitary manner.
14. Dead chickens must be disposed of according to the Minnesota Board of
Animal Health rules which require chicken carcasses to be disposed of as soon
as possible after death, usually within 48 to 72 hours. Legal forms of chicken
carcass disposal include burial, off-site incineration or rendering, or composting.
§ 95.67. Violations.
1. Any person violating any of the sections of this article shall be deemed guilty of a
misdemeanor and upon conviction, shall be penalized in accordance with Section
10.99.
2. If any person is found guilty by a court for violation of this section, their permit to
own, keep, harbor, or have custody of chickens shall be deemed automatically
revoked and no new permit may be issued for a period of one year.
3. Any person violating any conditions of this permit shall reimburse the city for all
costs borne by the city to enforce the conditions of the permit including, but not
limited to, the pickup and impounding of chickens.
§ 95.68. Issuance, Revocation.
A. If granted, the permit shall be issued by the city clerk and officer and shall state
the conditions, if any, imposed upon the permitted for the keeping of chickens under this
permit. The permit shall specify the restrictions, limitations, conditions and prohibitions
which the officer deems reasonably necessary to protect any person or neighboring use
from unsanitary conditions, unreasonable noise or odors, or annoyance, or to protect the
public health and safety. Such permit may be modified from time to time or revoked by the
officer for failure to conform to such restrictions, limitations, or prohibitions. Such
modification or revocation shall be effective after ten days following the mailing of written
notice thereof by certified mail to the person or persons keeping or maintaining such
chickens.
B. The city may revoke any permit issued under this article if the person holding
the permit refuses or fails to comply with this article, with any regulations promulgated by
7
the city council pursuant to this article, or with any state or local law governing cruelty to
animals or the keeping of animals. Any person whose permit is revoked shall, within ten
days thereafter, humanely dispose of all chickens being owned, kept or harbored by such
person, and no part of the permit fee shall be refunded.
SECTION 8. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title IX:
General Regulations; Chapter 95: Animals, by adding the following language:
ARTICLE VI. KEEPING OF BEES
Sec. 95.50 Definitions
Sec. 95.51 Purpose of Ordinance
Sec. 95.52 Standards of Practice
Sec. 95.53 Colony Density
Sec. 95.54 Permit Required
Sec. 95.55 Penalty for Violation of Section
§ 95.70 Definitions
The following words and terms shall have meanings ascribed in this section unless the
context of their used indicates another usage:
Apiary means the assembly of one or more colonies of bees at a single location.
Beekeeper means a person who owns or has charge of one or more colonies of bees.
Beekeeping equipment means anything used in the operation of an apiary, such as
hive bodies, supers, frames, top and bottom boards and extractors.
Colony means an aggregate of bees consisting principally of workers, but having,
when perfect, one queen and at times drones, brood, combs, and honey.
Hive means the receptacle inhabited by a colony that is manufactured for that
purpose.
Honey bee means all life stages of the common domestic honey bee, apis mellifera
(African subspecies and Africanized hybrids are not allowed).
Lot means a contiguous parcel of land under common ownership.
§ 95.71 Purpose of Ordinance
The purpose of this section is to establish certain requirements for beekeeping within the
city, to avoid issues that might otherwise be associated with beekeeping in populated
areas.
1. Compliance with this section shall not be a defense to a proceeding alleging
that a given colony constitutes a nuisance, but such compliance may be offered as
evidence of the beekeeper’s efforts to abate any previous nuisance.
2. Compliance with this section shall not be a defense to a proceeding alleging
that a given colony violates applicable ordinances regarding public health, but such
8
compliance may be offered as evidence of the beekeeper’s compliance with acceptable
standards of practice among hobby beekeepers in the State of Minnesota.
§ 95.72 Standards of Practice
These standards of practice apply only to lots smaller than five (5) acres.
1. Honey bee colonies shall be kept in hives with removable frames, which must be kept
in sound and usable conditions.
2. Each beekeeper must ensure that a convenient source of water is available within ten
feet of each colony at all times that the colonies remain active outside the hive.
3. Each beekeeper must ensure that no wax comb or other material that might encourage
robbing by other bees that are left upon the grounds of the apiary lot. Such materials
once removed from the site shall be handled and stored in sealed containers, or placed
within a building or other vermin-proof container.
4. Each beekeeper shall maintain his beekeeping equipment in good condition, including
keeping the hived painted if they have been painted but are peeling or flaking, and
securing unused equipment from weather, potential theft or vandalism and occupancy
by swarms.
5. Honey bee colonies may only be kept on lots one-half acre lots or larger.
6. Each beekeeper is allowed to make in person sales of honey from the beekeeper’s
residence as long as the following standards are met:
i. The beekeeper must live on the apiary lot;
ii. All honey sold in person on the residential premise must be produced by the
beekeeper’s hives that are located on the subject residential premise;
iii. No products may be sold in person at the residence except honey and honey
related products produced from hives on the premise;
iv. No outside storage or display of products or merchandise;
v. No traffic that is greater than the residential level of the neighborhood;
vi. No separate business entrance;
vii. All signage must comply with city sign regulations;
viii. Not more than 15 percent of the total gross floor area of the residence or 200
square feet, whichever is less is devoted to making, storing, and selling honey;
ix. No activity or equipment may be used that creates noise, vibration, glare,
fumes, odor, or electric or television interference is permitted if it is detectable by adjacent
neighbors; and
x. No nonresident employees are permitted.
§ 95.73 Colony Density
1. No person is permitted to keep more than the following numbers of colonies on any lot
within the city, based upon the size of the apiary lot:
9
i. Lot equal to or larger than half acre but smaller than three-fourths acre: four
colonies;
ii. Lot larger than three-fourths acre lot but smaller than one acre: six colonies;
iii. One acre lot but smaller than five acres: eight colonies;
iv. Five acres or larger: no restriction.
2. In each instance where a colony is kept less than 25 feet from a property line of the lot
upon which the apiary is located, the beekeeper shall establish and maintain a flyway
barrier at least six feet in height.
§ 95.74 Permit Required
1. No beekeeping may occur on any property unless the city issues a permit to the beekeeper
on that specific property. The permit will be valid for two growing seasons.
2. A beekeeping permit will only be issued if:
a. The permit application documents the satisfaction of all applicable items found in
Sections 95.70-95.75 of the City Code, and
b. Notices have been mailed to all homes within 150 feet of the applicant’s property
lines.
i. If there are objections received within ten days of mailing the notices, then the
permit application must be considered by the city council.
ii. If there are no objections received within ten days of mailing the notices, then the
permit application will be processed by city staff. It will not be referred to the city
council for consideration.
3. Permits are non-transferable and do not run with the land.
4. A permit constitutes a limited license granted to the beekeeper by the city and in no way
creates a vested zoning right.
5. By signing the permit, the beekeeper acknowledges that he or she shall defend and
indemnify the city against any and all claims arising out of keeping the bees on the
premises.
6. Beekeeping permit fees shall be as established by the city council.
7. All standards of practice and colony density standards must be met in order to issue a
permit.
8. If the standards of practice are not maintained subsequent to issuance of a beekeeping
permit, the permit may be revoked by the city.
9. Beekeeping training is required for the beekeeper prior to issuance of an initial beekeeping
permit by the city.
10
i. Either provide a certificate of completion from a honeybee keeping course from the
University of Minnesota or from Century College;
ii. Request consideration for having completed a comparable course from another
institution or instructor;
iii. Request consideration for substituting equivalent experience for the honeybee keeping
course; or
iv. Provide a letter from a current beekeeping instructor at the University of Minnesota,
Century College, or other educational institution offering similar beekeeping courses
that states that the permit applicant has gained through other means a substantially
similar knowledge base to one that could be gained through appropriate beekeeping
courses at the University of Minnesota or Century College.
10. Any beekeeper wishing to make in person sales of honey from their home according to the
standards of practice section must so indicate on the annual permit.
§ 95.75 Penalty for Violation of Section
Any person who shall violate the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor
and upon conviction, shall be penalized in accordance with Section 10.99.
SECTION 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo.
SECTION 10. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-0XX was adopted on this ________ day
of __________________ 2013, by a vote of _________ Ayes and ________ Nays.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
________________________________
Mike Pearson
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Adam Bell
City Clerk
This Ordinance 08-0XX was published on the ______ day of ____________________, 2013.
11
§ 154.914 LIVESTOCK.
(A) Prohibition of manure deposition without safeguards. No manure or livestock waste
shall be deposited, stored, kept, or allowed to remain upon any site without reasonable
safeguards adequate to prevent the escape or movement of the manure or wastes or a solution of
the manure or wastes from the site which may result in pollution of any public waters or any
health hazard.
(B) Pollution Control Agency standard minimum requirement. All regulations imposed by
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency relating to keeping of livestock shall be adhered to and
the regulations shall be considered the minimum safeguard necessary to prevent pollution of
public water or creation of a health hazard.
(C) Inadequate safeguards. In case the Zoning Administrator shall find that any manure is
stored or kept on any lot or storage site without a safeguard, or that any existing safeguard is
inadequate, the Zoning Administrator may order the owner or other responsible person to
immediately remove the manure from the storage site and refrain from further storage or keeping
of any manure at the site unless and until an adequate safeguard is provided.
(D) Hazards and nuisances. On parcels of less than 40 acres which are not part of a larger
crop- producing commercial agricultural farm, the keeping of horses, cattle, or other grazing
animals on a site with less than 2 acres of existing grazable land per animal is, by this section,
declared to be a nuisance. Horses may be kept on any parcel larger than 5 acres. No other
domestic farm animals, livestock or commercial kennels shall be placed on any site of less than
10 acres.
(E) Grazable acres. Grazable acreage shall be defined as open, non-treed acreage
exclusive of the homesite and yard that is currently providing enough pasture or other
agricultural crops capable of supporting summer grazing at a density of 1 cow, or its equivalent,
per 2 acres. Grazable acreage shall not include non-jurisdictional wetlands or slopes over 12%.
(1) For purposes of these regulations, the following animal equivalents apply: one
slaughter steer, heifer or horse - 1.0; one mature dairy cow - 1.4; one swine over 55 pounds - .4;
one sheep -.1; one turkey - .01; one chicken - .01; one duck - .02.
(2) For all other animals, the number of animal units shall be defined as the average
weight of the animal divided by 1,000 pounds.
(1997 Code, § 300.13 Subd. 15) (Am. Ord. 9763, passed 9-19-2000) Penalty, see § 154.999
Source: Esri, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, GeoEye, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User
Community
Data Scource: Washington County, MN9-6-2013
Animal Ordinance Research Map
KParcel Size (Acres)
3.00 - 4.99
5.00 - 9.990.50 - 2.99
0.00 - 0.49
10.00 - 485.19 0 0.5 10.25 Miles