HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Agenda Packet 02-11-13
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, February 11, 2013 at 7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Approve Agenda
3. Approve Minutes
a. January 14, 2012
4. Business Items
a. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT – PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
ORDINANCE. The Planning Commission will consider amendments to the City’s
PUD Ordinance (§154.070) to incorporate current best practices related to the
implementation of PUDs, as well as integrating the ordinance into the new
structure of the Zoning Code. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on
this proposed amendment on 12/10/12 and further discussed the proposed
ordinance at the meeting on 1/14/13.
b. COMMNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 2012 ANNUAL REPORT.
Staff has prepared a report documenting the Planning Department and
Commission activities during 2012. The Commission is asked to review the
content of the report and provide any comments or suggestions before the report
is submitted to the City Council.
c. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 2013 WORK PLAN. The
Commission is being asked to review a proposed plan of work for 2013 to be
submitted to the City Council for review and consideration.
5. Updates
a. City Council Updates
i. Christ Lutheran Church Lot Size Variance: Approved at the 2/5/13
Council meeting.
ii. Valley Branch Watershed District Conditional Use Permit: Approved at
the 2/5/13 meeting.
b. Staff Updates
i. Upcoming Meetings:
1. Planning Commission Meeting, 2/25/13
a. Zoning Text Amendment – minimum district standards for
LDR Zoning District
b. Comprehensive Plan Amendment – Village Land Use Plan
ii. Citizen Planner Handbook & APA Planning Commissioner Training
Webinar, 4/13/13.
c. Commission Concerns
6. Adjourn
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1‐14‐13
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Workshop Meeting
Minutes of January 14, 2012
Chairman Williams called to order the workshop of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission
at 7:00pm
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Fliflet, Obermueller, Larson, Kreimer, Reeves, Morreale,
Haggard and Williams;
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Hall and Haggard;
STAFF PRESENT: Administrator Zuleger, Planning Director Klatt and City Planner Johnson
Election of Officers:
M/S/P: Reeves/Kreimer motion to nominate Todd Williams as Chairman of the Planning
Commission; motion carried: Vote: 7‐0.
M/S/P: Williams/Kreimer motion to nominate Julie Fliflet as Vice Chairwoman of the
Planning Commission; motion carried: Vote: 7‐0.
M/S/P: Williams/Reeves motion to nominate Tom Kreimer as Secretary of the Planning
Commission; motion carried: Vote: 7‐0.
Approve Agenda:
Chairman Williams added a discussion about parliamentary procedure to the Agenda
before the approval of the minutes.
Parliamentary Procedure Discussion
Chairman Williams handed out an informational handout regarding Robert’s Rules of
Order. He noted that the Planning Commission generally follows Robert’s Rules for
guidance. In addition, Williams declared his intention to vote on all matters, being that
he is the Chairman. Also, he noted that members should not vote for items or minutes
at which they did not attend. Finally, Williams noted that in Robert’s Rules, an
abstention vote is the same as voting no. If a Commissioner wishes to not vote on an
item, then they should simply not vote as opposed to abstain. The Commission engaged
in a discussion regarding voting. To wrap up, Administrator Zuleger noted that tabling
an agenda items signals the Planning Commission’s intention to return to that item later
in the meeting. If the Commission wishes to put off an agenda item to the next
meeting, than the correct action is to postpone the meeting.
2
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1‐14‐13
Approve Minutes: December 10, 2012
Chairman Williams suggested one change pertaining to the discussion of the Subdivision
Ordinance.
Williams moved to accept the minute of December 10, 2012 as amended; Vote: 7‐0.
Approve Minutes: December 18, 2012
Minutes were accepted as presented.
Public Hearing Item: Variance – 3549 Lake Elmo Ave N. (Christ Lutheran Church)
Klatt presented a summary of the request. The request includes a variance for lot size
and lot width. The minimum lot size in the GB Zoning District is 1.5 acres, and the
minimum lot width in the GB Zoning District is 150’. After describing the request, Klatt
shared some information and history about the site. The site is 0.79 acres, and is larger
than many of the parcels in the downtown or Village. In addition, he presented a
snapshot of the area surrounding Christ Lutheran Church.
Moving on, Klatt explained where the proposed minor subdivision would occur. The
parcel would be split so that the Church retained the parking stalls on the northern half
of the parking lot, as well as the stormwater retention area. The southern half of the lot
would stay with the commercial property to the south. The resulting properties would
be 0.25 acres and 0.54 acres.
In terms of the reason for the request, the Church has noted that a potential buyer is
only interested in half of the parking area. Klatt explained that the amount of parking
required depends on the use of the building. Whatever the ultimate use becomes of the
former bank building, Staff is confident that there is enough parking to address the
needs of the commercial building. If there is a scenario where more parking is needed,
Klatt noted that Staff recommends that the Church and the user of the former bank
property should enter a shared parking agreement.
Klatt finished his presentation by noting that Staff is recommending approval of the
Variance with the condition that the applicant seek a shared parking agreement with
the future user of the former bank building.
Fliflet asked if the shared parking agreement can be structures in a way that the portion
of the lot that would be grouped with the commercial user can also be used by the
Church. Klatt noted that the agreement could be structured in such way.
3
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1‐14‐13
Reeves asked if the City would be locked into this variance if the sale of the former bank
building fell through. Klatt noted that the shared parking agreement would be recorded
on the deed on the former bank building at the time of the split.
Morreale asked what the property could be used for if the future owner was interested
in some other use than parking. Klatt noted that under the current zoning, the parcel
would not be considered a buildable lot. If the zoning was to change and the parcel was
sewered, than the minimum standards would change.
Obermueller asked about procedural items related to deeds and minor subdivisions.
Mr. Jim Kelly, Christ Lutheran Church, explained the reason for the variance request. He
noted that the size of the former bank parcel affects the purchase price for the potential
buyer.
Reeves asked if the applicant knew how many parking stalls the potential buyer typically
uses in a day.
Mr. Kelly noted that the potential buyer’s business does not attract large amounts of
walk‐up traffic. The potential buyer has noted that the parking would primarily be used
for a limited number of employees that work at the business.
Fliflet asked about the amount of parking that is used at peak times for the Church. Mr.
Kelly noted that a majority of the church‐retained portion of the lot has been used at
large services such as Christmas or Easter.
Williams asked if the Church investigated the option of using an easement over the
parking area as opposed to splitting the parcel and the proceeding with the sale. Mr.
Kelly noted that the Church is interested in the long‐term control of the property.
Williams also asked if the property is currently tax exempt.
Public Hearing opened at 7:43pm
Williams read a letter into the record from Kathy Weeks, 3647 Lake Elmo Ave. North.
Public Hearing closed at 7:44pm
Obermueller commented that the Church portion of the parking lot may need lighting in
the future. She asked that the Church consider including lighting that is consistent with
the theming of the downtown area. Klatt noted that the Planning Commission can make
a separate motion to encourage the Church to include lighting that is consistent with
downtown design or theming.
4
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1‐14‐13
M/S/P: Reeves/Larson, move to recommend approval of the variance with condition
that Church record a reciprocal shared parking agreement with the commercial
property, Vote: 6‐1 with Williams voting no.
Williams noted that he is opposed to the subdivision of a non‐conforming parcel into
two, smaller non‐conforming parcels. He added that a reciprocal shared parking
agreement could be recorded between the property‐owner after the fact. He noted
that he is not in favor of the motion as it stands now.
Fliflet noted that her concerns have been relieved in that the minimum lot standards in
the current zoning district reflect lots that are not sewered. Given that the sewer is
coming to the Village, she feels that the variance is appropriate. In addition, she
supports bringing activity to the downtown that needs additional activity. Kreimer
noted that other businesses have a lot less parking than the former bank building would
have.
Public Hearing Item: Conditional Use Permit – Valley Branch Watershed District: Raleigh
Creek Culvert Removal
Nick Johnson presented staff report and recommendation concerning a request from
the Valley Branch Watershed District to remove a culvert located along Raleigh Creek at
28th Street. The request is for a Conditional Use Permit, which is required in order to
perform grading work within a Floodplain District.
Fliflet asked about the need for future access to the site. Johnson noted there is one
additional buildable lot, but no other land that would need access (most of the land is
unbuildable).
Reeves asked if there might be any unforeseen City costs associated with the project.
Staff noted that the City Engineer has reviewed the projects and did not anticipate any
unusual city costs.
Nathan Campeau of Barr Engineering, representing the Valley Branch Watershed
District, had the opportunity to speak as the applicant. He discussed schedule of the
project, with the work likely being done in late summer. The VBWD is hoping to do
work when the flow in the creek is seasonally dry to minimize potential erosion control
issues.
Williams opened the Public Hearing at 8:10 p.m.
Glen Wickleman, 9065 28th St. N., spoke in favor of the project.
Jim Palacek, 2798 Jamley Ave. N., spoke in favor of the project, noting that his trees
have been flooded out during the winter due to freezing in the culvert.
5
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1‐14‐13
Tom Regan, 8875 27th St. N., provided some background history of the culvert and spoke
in favor of the project.
Williams closed the Public Hearing at 8:17 p.m.
M/S/P: Fliflet/Kreimer, move to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit,
Vote: 7‐0.
Business Item: Zoning Text Amendment – Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinance
Nick summarized discussion from previous meeting and reviewed the objectives for the
proposed amendments to the PUD ordinance. The proposed ordinance include three
major changes, including the addition of identifiable objectives for granting exceptions,
potential density bonus for projects that meet certain criteria, and a listing of preferred
site amenities related to the bonus.
Reeves would like to see the identified objectives better tied to the amenities required
for density bonus.
Williams asked Chief Malmquist to discuss which structures require sprinkler systems.
Malmquist noted that under the fire code, single family and twin homes are not
required to have a sprinkler system as long as they are under a certain square footage.
Malmquist noted that sprinklers will help contain fires, save property and lead to lower
insurance rates. He noted that the improvements necessary to add sprinklers to single
family homes are relatively minor in terms of cost compared to other work within a
residential structure.
Williams suggested that the Planning Commission review the proposed ordinance
section by section.
In §800 of the ordinance, the Planning Commission had no comments or concerns.
Regarding §801, Williams asked if the identified objectives should be listed in order of
preference. Johnson noted that the objectives do not need to be listed by priority
because it is the responsibility of the developers to address which objectives their
proposed development is meeting.
Reeves asked if it would read better if the primary objectives were highlighted, followed
by descriptions. Johnson noted that that could definitely help.
Williams noted that language within item B, “corridors and transitional areas”, should
be removed. The Planning Commission supported this proposal.
6
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1‐14‐13
Williams suggested that Staff clarify item D.
Williams suggested that “adaptive reuse” be removed from item F.
For item G, Williams suggested compatibility be stressed within and outside of the
development. The Planning Commission followed with a discussion on the intent of
provision. Reeves suggested keeping language more general.
In item J, Williams noted an editorial change of removing the unnecessary “and”.
Finally, Williams suggested adding a final objective “K” to encourage the inclusion of
certain site amenities that are not otherwise specified by this ordinance or other areas
of the Code. Reeves shared his concern with this objective potentially being the only
objective for which that the applicant complied. He suggested that additional amenities
could be considered with the other site amenities in the density sections to keep the
ordinance consistent.
In item C of §802, Kreimer noted his concern related to the size of the bonus and the
ability of developers to exceed the ultimate number of residential units contained
within the City’s land use plans. Johnson reviewed the general development process
and explained that Staff can track the number of residential units that are added as
projects come forward. Further down the line, the City will have the opportunity to
adjust its Comprehensive Land Use Plan to reduce the amount of units if the City is
projecting that more residential units will be added than previously agreed to. Fliflet
also noted that she has some concern that the 20% might be too much additional
density.
Reeves suggested that the number of amenities points be more limited and restricted to
things that are only in the identified objectives.
Fliflet noted her concern regarding the objective for open space, noting that clustering
would allow more density which might not be the ultimate objective. The Planning
Commission and Staff engaged in a general discussion regarding the requirements for
open space.
There was additional discussion pertaining to density and floor ratio bonuses.
Obermueller expressed her concern that the bonuses may lead to development that
does not meet expectations for Lake Elmo. Klatt suggested that PC consider 20% with
additional clarification from Staff regarding the relationship of a planned development
to the Comprehensive Plan and Memorandum of Understanding with the Metropolitan
Council. Additional discussion followed about incentives and how to incorporate them
into the Code.
7
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1‐14‐13
Regarding §803 of the ordinance, Williams suggested that the minimum lot area should
be larger than 5 acres, particularly for the I‐94 Corridor. He suggested a minimum of 20
acres. The Planning Commission discussed the proposal and determined that 5 acres
seemed like a reasonable minimum area.
Fliflet expressed her concern with density bonuses and how they will apply on a site by
site basis. She noted that the actual impact of the amenities will depend on the specific
site. Reeves shared that some of the descriptors or standards for the amenities are hard
to pin down. He also wanted to know how the City can greater incentivize more of the
objectives verses the specific site amenities. Johnson noted that some of the standards
are more easily quantified while others may be more subjective.
Kreimer noted that he would like to see the language of “maximum density increase”,
and the number of amenity points awarded should be subject to Planning
Commission/Council review (i.e. points could be assigned a little lower). Staff expressed
concern with the process being subjective when different levels of points may be
awarded for the same amenity type. Klatt noted that this approach relies on Staff to
make judgment calls.
Williams asked if any other amenities should be discussed. They included the following:
• Underground Parking (10) – Larson felt that a range of numbers is more
appropriate.
• Historic preservation (10) – There was a general consensus that this was worthy
of 10 points.
• Open Space (10)
• Public ROW Dedication (10)
• LEED Standards (5)
• Pedestrian Improvements (5)
• Adaptive Reuse (5)
• Plaza (5) – The Planning Commission suggested that Staff consider a minimum
standard rather than percentage.
• Enhanced Storm Water Management (3) – Planning Commission suggested that
Staff make this standard more general, as opposed to solely rain gardens.
• Theming – Johnson explained that this standard may be better suited to a range
approach as far as the number of amenity points is concerned.
• Natural features (3)
• Landscaping (5) – Williams thought that landscaping could be a range up to 5
points.
Fliflet would like to see more of a range for all of the amenities.
8
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1‐14‐13
Larson asked if farmland preservation could be included as a separate amenity. There
should be some bonus for farming within a development.
The Planning Commission wrapped up its discussion of the PUD Ordinance for the
evening. Williams suggested postponing the ordinance for further consideration until
next meeting
M/S/P: Williams/Fliflet, move to postpone consideration on PUD Ordinance until next
available Planning Commission meeting, Vote: 7‐0.
Business Item: 2012 Community Development Department Annual Report
The Planning Commission suggested reviewing the report at the next meeting. Klatt will
present the report at the next meeting.
Updates and Concerns ‐ None
Meeting adjourned at 10:56p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nick Johnson
Planner
BUSINESS ITEM 4a – ACTION ITEM
Planning Commission
Date: 2/11/13
Item: 4a
Business Item
ITEM: Zoning Text Amendment – Planned Unit Development Ordinance
SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
______________________________________
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is asked to review a zoning text amendment that would allow
for the addition of a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinance. The Planning
Commission held a Public Hearing on 12/10/12 and reviewed the ordinance on 1/14/13,
at which time the item was postponed. The purpose of the new ordinance is to implement
best practices related to procedure, the incorporation of public amenities, and a structured
approach to density bonuses. In addition, the PUD Ordinance is part of an ongoing
effort to make significant improvements to the structure and organization of the Zoning
Code.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At the meeting on January 14, 2013, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed
PUD Ordinance and made several recommendations on how to improve the ordinance.
These changes that have been included in the current draft of the ordinance include the
following:
• Several editorial changes were made to the document to reflect the policy
recommendations of the Planning Commission.
• Regarding increased residential densities associated with planned developments,
a statement was added to §154.802D to reflect the City’s ability to evaluate
proposals for additional density in light of the City’s Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. Staff has determined that this statement will be an
effective means to evaluate PUD proposals against the City’s overall goals for
growth. In other words, requests for increased densities may be denied if the
resulting planned development is starkly in contrast with the City’s goals within
the Comprehensive Plan.
• At the request of the Planning Commission, certain site amenities may be
awarded a range of amenity points based upon the quality and magnitude of the
amenity. More specifically, two amenities have been guided for a range of
amenity points per the direction of the Planning Commission. These amenities
2
BUSINESS ITEM 4a – ACTION ITEM
are Enhanced Landscaping and Theming. However, it should be noted that Staff
is hesitant to support this approach to awarding amenity points. The reason is that
is that each project will stand on its own merit, and it may be difficult to compare
various projects when determining how to award amenity points for a particular
amenity. For example, for Enhanced Landscaping, it may be difficult to
determine what landscaping plan is deserving of 4 amenity points versus 3
amenity points. In other words, this approach requires the Staff, Planning
Commission and City Council to make judgment calls that are not based in any
quantifiable standard and may be subjective in nature.
• For the underground, structure or contained parking amenity, Staff removed the
requirement for the reduction of surface parking by 75%. Through discussion
with the Planning Commission, it was determined that this standard may be
difficult to comply with, and as long as the end objective is achieved, a project
should be rewarded for reducing visible impact of surface parking.
• Based upon the proposal of the Chief Greg Malmquist, Lake Elmo Fire
Department, Staff included fire sprinkler systems for structure not required to
install such systems as a site amenity worth of 10 amenity points. Staff agrees
with Chief Malmquist that this provision will increase public safety and have
other benefits for the community (reduced insurance rates, less hydrants, etc.). In
addition, it is likely that most structures that are constructed as part of a PUD
would be required to be sprinkled anyway. This amenity would more be focused
towards single family and twin homes.
• The standard for the plaza site amenity was changed to remove the percentage
standard for size of the plaza. The standard for this amenity now simply reflects
a minimum size of 1,000 square feet. Staff feels that this standard will be large
enough to achieve the desired effect for plazas in mixed-use, residential or
commercial developments in the Village and I-94 Corridor.
In addition to these changes, Staff did consider other ideas presented by the Planning
Commission, but did not yet include them to wait for potential consensus. These ideas
include the following:
• The integration of active farming or local produce production as a site amenity
warranting some level of amenity points.
• Additional amenity points awarded to planned developments that achieve multiple
identified objectives (§154.801) of PUDs. This could be structures on a
progressive scale, awarding additional points for the higher number of objectives
achieved. Staff viewed the identified objectives as a requirement for approval of
a planned development as opposed to an amenity itself. In other words, the
objectives do not allow a development to come forward solely for the purpose of a
density increase.
The Planning Commission is asked to give these two ideas consideration in moving the
draft ordinance forward.
With the previously discussed changes, Staff has aimed to address the discussion and
review of the Planning Commission in regards to the proposed planned unit development
ordinance. In working to improve the Zoning Code, the adoption of a new PUD
3
BUSINESS ITEM 4a – ACTION ITEM
Ordinance is another step in updating the Code to reflect improved performance and a
structure that are consistent with best practices. Staff will continue to work on updating
other elements of the Zoning Code incrementally to achieve better organization and
implementation.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the
proposed PUD Ordinance through the following motion:
“Move to recommend approval of the proposed Planned Unit Development Ordinance
in order to incorporate best practices related to the execution of PUDs”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. DRAFT PUD Ordinance (§154.800)
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ...................................................................................Planning Staff
- Report by Staff ..............................................................................Planning Staff
- Questions from the Commission ....................... Chair & Commission Members
- Discussion by the Commission ......................... Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission................................ Chair & Commission Members
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-1 Planned Unit Development
ARTICLE 17. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) REGULATIONS
§154.800 Intent
§154.801 Identified Objectives
§154.802 Allowed Development
§154.803 Minimum Requirements
§154.804 Density
§154.805 Coordination with Other Regulations
§154.806 Phasing and Guarantee of Performance
§154.807 Control of Planned Unit Development
§154.808 Procedures for Processing a Planned Unit Development
§154.809 Application Requirements for General Concept Plan and Final Plan
§154.810 City Cost
§154.800 Intent
This article establishes the procedures and standards for the development of areas as unified, planned
developments in accordance with the intent and purpose of this zoning ordinance and the applicable
policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Because of the larger size of PUDs and to help achieve the
identified objectives for planned unit development sites, this article provides for flexibility in the use
of land and the placement and size of buildings in order to better utilize site features and obtain a
higher quality of development. Approval of a planned unit development shall result in a zoning change
to a specific PUD district, with specific requirements and standards that are unique to that
development.
§154.801 Identified Objectives
When reviewing requests for approval of a planned unit development, the City shall consider whether
one or more of the objectives listed below will be served or achieved. It is the responsibility of the
applicant to provide a narrative of how the proposed planned development meets one or more of the
City’s identified objectives (A-J). Planned unit developments should not be allowed simply for the
purpose of increasing overall density or allowing development that otherwise could not be approved.
A. Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than
conventional approaches;
B. Promotion of integrated land uses, allowing for a mixture of residential, commercial, and
public facilities;
C. Provision of more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities
and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under conventional land
development techniques;
D. Accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities
and/or commercial facilities; and especially to create additional opportunities for senior and
affordable housing;
E. Preservation and enhancement of important environmental features through careful and
sensitive placement of buildings and facilities;
F. Preservation of historic buildings, structures or landscape features;
G. Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility with
surrounding land uses;
H. Creation of more efficient provision of public utilities and services, lessened demand on
transportation, and the promotion of energy resource conservation;
I. Allowing the development to operate in concert with a redevelopment plan in certain areas of
the City and to ensure the redevelopment goals and objectives will be achieved; and
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-2 Planned Unit Development
J. Higher standards of site and building design than would otherwise be provided under
conventional land development technique.
§154.802 Allowed Development
Uses within the PUD may include only those uses generally considered associated with the general land
use category shown for the area on the official Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Specific allowed uses
and performance standards for each PUD shall be delineated in an ordinance and development plan.
The PUD development plan shall identify all the proposed land uses and those uses shall become
permitted uses with the acceptance of the development plan. Any change in the list of uses approved
in the development plan will be considered an amendment to the PUD, and will follow the procedures
specified in Article 3, Administration, for zoning amendments.
A. Permitted uses. The PUD application shall identify all proposed land uses and those uses shall
become permitted uses upon the approval of the planned unit development.
B. Placement of structures. More than one principal building may be placed on a platted lot
within a planned unit development. The appearance and compatibility of buildings in relation
to one another, other site elements, and surrounding development shall be considered in the
review process.
C. Development intensity. The PUD may provide for an increase in the maximum gross floor area
or floor area ratio by up to twenty percent (20%) of that allowed in the base zoning district, for
the purpose of promoting project integration and additional site amenities.
D. Density. The PUD may provide for an increase in density of residential development by up to
twenty percent (20%) of that allowed in the base zoning district, for the purpose of promoting
diversity of housing types and additional site amenities. Increased residential densities of
varying levels will be awarded based upon the provision of a combination of various site
amenities outlined in Section 154.804. In addition, the City retains the right to evaluate all
proposals for bonus density in accordance with the overall goals of the City’s Land Use Element
of the Comprehensive Plan.
E. Building setbacks. The PUD may provide for a reduction in or elimination of required setbacks
in the base zoning district, provided that a landscaped setback area of the minimum width
established for the base zoning district is maintained along the periphery of the adjacent
zoning district(s).
F. Lot requirements. The Council may authorize reductions in the area and width of individual
lots within a PUD from that required for the base zoning district, provided that such reductions
are compensated for by an equivalent amount of open space or other public amenities
elsewhere in the planned unit development. Any open space shall not include areas designated
as public or private streets. The plan may increase the maximum density beyond that
permitted in the base zoning district for the purpose of promoting an integrated project with a
variety of housing types and additional site amenities.
G. Other exceptions. As part of PUD approval, the Council is authorized to approve other
exceptions to the zoning controls applicable to the base zoning district, such as the maximum
height of structures or the minimum off-street parking requirements. Such exceptions shall
only be granted when they are clearly warranted to achieve the objectives identified in Section
154.801.
§154.803 Minimum Requirements
A. Lot area. A PUD must include a minimum of five (5) acres for undeveloped land or two (2)
acres for developed land within the approved development. Tracts of less than two (2) acres
may be approved only if the applicant can demonstrate that a project of superior design can be
achieved to meet one or more of the identified objectives listed in Section 154.801, or that
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies can be attained through the use of
the PUD process. The Planning Commission shall authorize submittal of a PUD for a tract of
less than two acres prior to submittal of a general concept plan application.
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-3 Planned Unit Development
B. Open space. For all PUDs, at least twenty percent (20%) of the project area not within street
rights-of-way shall be preserved as protected open space. Other public or site amenities may
be approved as an alternative to this requirement. Any required open space must be available
to the residents, tenants, or customers of the PUD for recreational purposes or similar benefit.
Land reserved for stormwater detention facilities and other required site improvements may be
applied to this requirement. Open space shall be designed to meet the needs of residents of
the PUD and the surrounding neighborhoods, to the extent practicable, for parks, playgrounds,
playing fields and other recreational facilities.
C. Street layout. In existing developed areas, the PUD should maintain the existing street grid,
where present, and restore the street grid where it has been disrupted. In newly developing
areas, streets shall be designed to maximize connectivity in each cardinal direction, except
where environmental or physical constraints make this infeasible. All streets shall terminate at
other streets, at public land, or at a park or other community facility, except that local streets
may terminate in stub streets when those will be connected to other streets in future phases of
the development or adjacent developments.
§154.804 Density
The PUD may provide for an increase in density of residential development by up to twenty percent
(20%) of that allowed in the base zoning district. Applicants seeking increased residential density
through a Planned Unit Development are required to provide at least one (1) or a combination of site
amenities that equal the required amount of amenity points to achieve the desired density bonus.
A. Amenity Points and Equivalent Density Increases. Increases in density will be awarded through
a 1:1 ratio with amenity points. For every increase in amenity points for a Planned Unit
Development, the applicant will be allowed an equivalent amount of density increase, up to a
maximum increase of twenty percent (20%). Table 15-1 outlines the required amount of
amenity points to achieve various density increases.
Table 15-1: Amenity Points and Equivalent Density Increases
Amenity Points Density Increase
5 5%
10 10%
15 15%
20 20%
B. Site Amenities. Site amenities that are eligible for amenity points are listed in Table 15-2,
including the associated standards of implementation. Some of the amenities may be awarded
a range of amenity point based upon the quality and magnitude of the amenity. Where the
amenity does not meet all of the standards required in Table 15-2, no points shall be awarded.
Partial points for site amenities shall not be awarded, except as otherwise allowed in Table 15-
2.
Table 15-2: Site Amenities
Points Amenity Standards
10 Underground, Structure
or Contained Parking
Proposed underground, structure or contained parking must be
integrated into the building footprint. The purpose of this
amenity is to better integrate parking into the site, as well as
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-4 Planned Unit Development
reduce the amount of surface parking visible from the public
right-of-way and reduce the amount of impervious surface. The
facade of any integrated parking areas must match the
architectural design of the principal structure.
10 Historic Preservation
Preservation, rehabilitation or restoration of designated historic
landmarks in a manner that is consistent with the standards for
rehabilitation of the Secretary of the Interior as part of the
development.
10 Additional Open Space
A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the site not occupied by
buildings shall be landscaped outdoor open space. A minimum
of fifty percent (50%) of the provided open space shall be
contiguous. Open space classifications that qualify may include
natural habitat, neighborhood recreation, trail corridors or
open space buffers.
10 Public Right-of-Way
Dedication
Dedication of land and construction of a public road, trail,
pathway, or greenway that is part of an approved City plan, but
outside the scope of the immediate project area. Right-of-way
improvements should be designed per the specification of the
City Engineer.
10 Fire Sprinkler Systems
The installation of fire sprinkler systems, per NFPA 13, 13D or
13R, in structures that are not currently required to install
these systems under State Code.
5
Leadership in Energy
and Environmental
Design
The proposed development shall meet the minimum standards
for LEED Silver certification. The project does not have to
achieve actual LEED certification; however, the developer must
submit the LEED checklist and documentation to the City,
approved by a LEED Accredited Professional (LEED-AP), which
shows that the project will comply with LEED Silver
requirements.
5 Pedestrian
Improvements
A site and building design that allows for exceptional and
accessible pedestrian and/or bicycle access through and/or
around a site. The improvements shall use a combination of
trails, landscaping, decorative materials, access control and
lighting to create safe, clear and aesthetically pleasing
pedestrian facilities through and /or around the site that
comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility
requirements.
5 Adaptive Reuse Significant renovation, rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of an
existing building(s), rather than demolition.
5 Plaza
Plazas shall have a minimum area not less than one thousand
(1,000) square feet. Plazas for commercial or mixed-use
development shall be open to the public during daylight hours.
1-5 Enhanced Landscaping
A Landscaping Plan of exceptional design that has a variety of
native tree, shrub and plan types that provide seasonal interest
and that exceeds the requirements of the Lake Elmo Design
Standards Manual. The landscaped areas should have a
resource efficient irrigation system. The Landscaping Plan shall
be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. Amenity points
shall be awarded based upon the quality and magnitude of the
Landscaping Plan.
3 Enhanced Stormwater Provide capacity for infiltrating stormwater generated onsite
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-5 Planned Unit Development
Management with artful rain garden design that serves as a visible amenity.
Rain garden designs shall be visually compatible with the form
and function of the space and shall include long-term
maintenance of the design. The design shall conform to the
requirements per the Minnesota Stormwater Manual and shall
meet the approval of the City Engineer.
1-3 Theming
Significant utilization of various elements of Theming consistent
with the 2013 Lake Elmo Theming Project, including but not
limited to signage, fencing, landscaping, lighting and site
furnishings. Amenity points will be awarded based upon the
magnitude or amount of Theming elements integrated into the
project.
3 Natural Features
Site planning that preserves significant natural features or
restores ecological functions of a previously damaged natural
environment.
§154.805 Coordination With Other Regulations
A. Coordination with subdivision review. Subdivision review under the subdivision regulations
shall be carried out simultaneously with the review of the PUD. The plans required under this
Article shall be submitted in a form that will satisfy the requirements of the Subdivision
Ordinance for the preliminary and final plat.
B. Coordination with other zoning requirements. All of the provisions of this Chapter applicable
to the original district within which the Planned Unit Development District is established shall
apply to the PUD District except as otherwise provided in approval of the Final Plan.
§154.806 Phasing and Guarantee of Performance
A. Development Schedule. The City shall compare the actual development accomplished in the
various PUD zones with the approved development schedule.
B. Schedule extension. For good cause shown by the property owner, the City Council may extend
the limits of the development schedule.
C. Phasing of amenities. The construction and provision of all of the common open space, site
amenities and public and recreational facilities which are shown on the final development plan
must proceed at the same rate as the construction of dwelling units, if any. The Development
Review Committee shall review all of the building permits issued for the PUD and examine the
construction which has taken place on the site. If they find that the rate of construction of
dwelling units is greater than the rate at which common open spaces, site amenities and public
and recreational facilities have been constructed and provided, they shall forward this
information to the City Council for action.
D. Guarantees. A financial guarantee or letter of credit shall be required to guarantee
performance by the developer. The amount of this guarantee or letter of credit, and the
specific elements of the development program that it is intended to guarantee, will be
stipulated in the development agreement.
E. Changes during development period.
1. Minor changes in the location, placement and height of structures may be authorized by
the Development Review Committee if required by engineering or other circumstances not
foreseen at the time the final plan was approved and filed with the Planning Director.
2. Changes in uses, any rearrangement of lots, blocks and building tracts, changes in the
provision of common open spaces, and all other changes to the approved final development
plan may be made only under the procedures for zoning amendments, Article 3. Any
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-6 Planned Unit Development
changes shall be recorded as amendments to the recorded copy of the final development
plan.
F. Rezoning to original district. If substantial development has not occurred within a reasonable
time after approval of the PUD Zoning District, the City Council may instruct the Planning
Commission to initiate rezoning to the original zoning district. It shall not be necessary for the
City Council to find that the rezoning was in error.
§154.807 Control of Planned Unit Development Following Completion
A. Final development plan controls subsequent use. After the certificate of occupancy has been
issued, the use of the land and the construction, modification or alteration of any buildings or
structures within the planned development shall be governed by the final development plan.
B. Allowed changes. After the certificate of occupancy has been issued, no changes shall be
made in the approved final development plan except upon application as provided below:
1. Any minor extensions, alterations or modifications of existing buildings or structures may
be authorized by the Development Review Committee if they are consistent with the
purposes and intent of the final plan. No change authorized by this Section may increase
the cubic volume of any building or structure by more than ten percent.
2. Any building or structure that is totally or substantially destroyed may be reconstructed
only in compliance with the final development plan unless an amendment to the final
development plan is approved under this chapter.
C. Amendment required for major changes. Any other changes in the final development plan,
including any changes in the use of common open space, must be authorized by an amendment
of the final development plan under the procedures for Zoning Amendments, Article 3.
§154.808 Procedures for Processing a Planned Unit Development.
There are four stages to the PUD process: application conference, general concept plan, preliminary
plan and final plan, as described below.
A. Application Conference. Upon filing of an application for PUD, the applicant of the proposed
PUD shall arrange for and attend a conference with the Planning Director. The primary purpose
of the conference shall be to provide the applicant with an opportunity to gather information
and obtain guidance as to the general suitability of his or her proposal for the area for which it
is proposed and its conformity to the provisions of this Article before incurring substantial
expense in the preparation of plans, surveys and other data.
B. General Concept Plan. The general concept plan provides an opportunity for the applicant to
submit a plan to the city showing his or her basic intent and the general nature of the entire
development without incurring substantial cost. The plan should include the following: overall
density ranges, general location of residential and nonresidential land uses, their types and
intensities, general location of streets, paths and open space, and approximate phasing of the
development.
C. Preliminary Plan. Following approval of the General Concept Plan, the applicant shall submit a
Preliminary Plan application and preliminary plat, in accordance with the requirements
described in Section 153.07. The application shall proceed and be acted upon in accordance
with the procedures in this ordinance for zoning changes.
D. Final Plan. Following approval of the Preliminary Plan, the applicant shall submit a Final Plan
application and final plat, in accordance with the requirements described in Section 153.08.
The application shall proceed and be acted upon in accordance with the procedures in this
ordinance for zoning changes. If appropriate because of the limited scale of the proposal, the
preliminary plan and final plan may proceed simultaneously.
E. Schedule for Plan Approval.
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-7 Planned Unit Development
1. Developer presents the General Concept Plan to the Planning Commission for their review
and comment.
2. Within thirty (30) days after verification by the Planning Director that the required plan
and supporting data are adequate, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing,
with public notice.
3. The Planning Commission shall conduct the hearing and report its findings and make
recommendations to the City Council.
4. The City may request additional information from the applicant concerning operational
factors or retain expert testimony at the expense of the applicant concerning operational
factors.
5. The Council may hold a public hearing after the receipt of the report and recommendations
from the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission fails to make a report within 60
days after receipt of the application, then the City Council may proceed without the
report. The Council may approve the General Concept Plan and attach such conditions as it
deems reasonable.
6. Following approval of the General Concept Plan, the application may proceed to the
Preliminary Plan phase.
7. Developer presents the Preliminary Plan to the Planning Commission for their review and
comment.
8. Within thirty (30) days after verification by the Planning Director that the required plan
and supporting data are adequate, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing,
with public notice.
9. The Planning Commission shall conduct the hearing and report its findings and make
recommendations to the City Council.
10. The City may request additional information from the applicant concerning operational
factors or retain expert testimony at the expense of the applicant concerning operational
factors.
11. The Council may hold a public hearing after the receipt of the report and recommendations
from the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission fails to make a report within 60
days after receipt of the application, then the City Council may proceed without the
report. The Council may approve the Preliminary Plan and attach such conditions as it
deems reasonable.
12. Following approval of the Preliminary Plan, the application may proceed to the Final Plan
phase.
13. Developer presents the Final Plan to the Planning Commission for their review and
comment.
14. Within thirty (30) days after verification by the Planning Director that the required plan
and supporting data are adequate, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing,
with public notice.
15. The Planning Commission shall conduct the hearing and report its findings and make
recommendations to the City Council.
16. The City may request additional information from the applicant concerning operational
factors or retain expert testimony at the expense of the applicant concerning operational
factors.
17. The Council may hold a public hearing after the receipt of the report and recommendations
from the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission fails to make a report within 60
days after receipt of the application, then the City Council may proceed without the
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-8 Planned Unit Development
report. The Council may approve the Final Plan and attach such conditions as it deems
reasonable.
§154.809 Application Requirements for General Concept Plan, Preliminary Plan and Final
Plan.
Ten copies of the following plans, exhibits and documents shall be submitted at both the General
Concept Plan stage, Preliminary Plan stage and the Final Plan stage.
A. General Concept Plan Stage
1. General information
a. The landowner’s name and address and his/her interest in the subject property.
b. The applicant’s name and address if different from the landowner.
c. The names and addresses of all professional consultants who have contributed to the
development of the PUD plan being submitted, including but not limited to attorney,
land planner, engineer and surveyor.
2. Present Status
a. The address and legal description of the property.
b. The existing zoning classification and present use of the subject property and all lands
within 350 feet of the subject property.
c. A map depicting the existing development of the subject property and all land within
350 feet of the subject property and showing the location of existing streets, property
lines, easements, water mains, and storm and sanitary sewers, with invert elevations
on and within 100 feet of the subject property.
d. Site conditions: Where deemed necessary by the City, graphic reproductions of the
existing site conditions at a scale of one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet shall be
submitted and contain the following:
i. Contours; minimum five foot (5’) intervals.
ii. Location, type and extent of tree cover.
iii. Slope analysis.
iv. Location and extent of water bodies, wetlands, streams, and flood plains
within 300 feet of the subject property.
e. A written statement generally describing the proposed PUD and showing its relationship
to the City Comprehensive Plan.
f. Schematic drawing of the proposed development concept, including but not limited to
the general location of major circulation elements, public and common open space,
residential and other land uses.
g. Proposed design features related to proposed streets, showing right-of-way widths,
typical cross-sections, and areas other than streets including but not limited to
pedestrian ways, utility easements and stormwater facilities.
h. Statement of the estimated total number of dwelling units proposed for the PUD and a
tabulation of the proposed approximate allocations of land use expressed in acres and
as a percent of the total project area, which shall include at least the following:
i. Area devoted to residential use by building type.
ii. Area devoted to common open space.
iii. Area devoted to public open space and public amenities.
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-9 Planned Unit Development
iv. Approximate area devoted to, and number of, off-street parking and loading
spaces and related access.
v. Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to commercial uses.
vi. Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to industrial or office use.
i. When the PUD is to be constructed in stages during a period of time extending beyond
a single construction season, a preliminary schedule for the development of such stages
or units shall be submitted stating the approximate beginning and completion date for
each such stage and overall chronology of development to be followed from stage to
stage.
j. The City may excuse an applicant from submitting any specific item of information or
document required in this stage which it finds to be unnecessary to the consideration
of the specific proposal.
k. The City may require the submission of any additional information or documentation
which it may find necessary or appropriate to full consideration of the proposed PUD.
B. Preliminary Plan Stage
1. Preliminary plat and information required by subdivision title.
2. General information:
a. The landowner's name and address and his interest in the subject property.
b. The applicant's name and address if different from the landowner.
c. The names and addresses of all professional consultants who have contributed to the
development of the PUD plan being submitted, including but not limited to attorney,
land planner, engineer and surveyor.
d. Evidence that the applicant has sufficient control over the subject property to
effectuate the proposed PUD, including a statement of all legal, beneficial, tenancy
and contractual interests held in or affecting the subject property and including an up-
to-date certified abstract of title or registered property report, and such other
evidence as the City Attorney may require to show the status of title or control of the
subject property.
3. Present Status:
a. The address and legal description of the property.
b. The existing zoning classification and present use of the subject property and all lands
within 350 feet of the property.
c. A map depicting the existing development of the property and all land within 350 feet
thereof and indicating the location of existing streets, property lines, easements,
water mains and storm and sanitary sewers, with invert elevations on and within one
hundred feet of the property.
d. A written statement generally describing the proposed PUD and the market which it is
intended to serve and its demand showing its relationship to the City's Comprehensive
Plan and how the proposed PUD is to be designed, arranged and operated in order to
permit the development and use of neighboring property in accordance with the
applicable regulations of the City.
e. A statement of the proposed financing of the PUD.
f. Site conditions: Graphic reproductions of the existing site conditions at a scale of one
(1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet. All of the graphics should be at the same scale
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-10 Planned Unit Development
as the final plan to allow easy cross-reference. The use of overlays is recommended
for ease of analysis.
i. Contours; minimum two foot (2’) intervals.
ii. Location, type and extent of tree cover.
iii. Slope analysis.
iv. Location and extent of water bodies, wetlands and streams and flood plains
within 300 feet of the property.
v. Significant rock outcroppings.
vi. Existing drainage patterns.
vii. Vistas and significant views.
viii. Soil conditions as they affect development.
g. Schematic drawing of the proposed development concept, including but not limited to
the general location of major circulation elements, public and common open space,
residential and other land uses.
h. A statement of the estimated total number of dwelling units proposed for the PUD and
a tabulation of the proposed approximate allocations of land use expressed in acres
and as a percent of the total project area, which shall include at least the following:
i. Area devoted to residential use by building type.
ii. Area devoted to common open space.
iii. Area devoted to public open space and public amenities.
iv. Approximate area devoted to streets.
v. Approximate area devoted to, and number of, off-street parking and loading
spaces and related access.
vi. Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to commercial uses.
vii. Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to industrial or office use.
i. When the proposed PUD includes increases in density of residential development above
the base zoning district, a statement describing the site amenities to be included
within the PUD, and demonstrating that the proposed site amenities sufficiently
achieve the desired density bonus. Applicant is required to demonstrate that all site
amenity standards have been met in order to be awarded increased density for
residential development.
j. When the PUD is to be constructed in stages during a period of time extending beyond
a single construction season, a schedule for the development of such stages or units
shall be submitted stating the approximate beginning and completion date for each
such stage or unit and the proportion of the total PUD public or common open space
and dwelling units to be provided or constructed during each such state and overall
chronology of development to be followed from stage to stage.
k. When the proposed PUD includes provisions for public or common open space or service
facilities, a statement describing the provision that is to be made for the care and
maintenance of such open space or service facilities.
l. Any restrictive covenants that are to be recorded with respect to property included in
the proposed PUD.
m. Schematic utilities plans indicating placement of water, sanitary and storm sewers.
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-11 Planned Unit Development
n. The City may excuse an applicant from submitting any specific item of information or
document required in this stage which it finds to be unnecessary to the consideration
of the specific proposal.
o. The City may require the submission of any additional information or documentation
which it may find necessary or appropriate to full consideration of the proposed PUD.
C. Final Plan Stage. Development stage submissions should depict and outline the proposed
implementations of the Preliminary Plan stage for the PUD. Information from the General
Concept and Preliminary Plan stages may be included for background and to provide a basis for
the submitted plan. The development stage submissions shall include but not be limited to:
1. A final plat and information required by the City’s subdivision ordinance.
2. Final plans drawn to a scale of not less than 1 inch = 100 feet (or a scale requested by the
Zoning Administrator) containing at least the following information:
a. Proposed name of the development (which shall not duplicate nor be similar in
pronunciation to the name of any plat heretofore recorded in the county where the
subject property is situated).
b. Property boundary lines and dimensions of the property and any significant
topographical or physical features of the property.
c. The location, size, use and arrangement including height in stories and feet and total
square feet of ground area coverage and floor area of proposed buildings, including
manufactured homes, and existing buildings which will remain, if any.
d. Location, dimensions of all driveways, entrances, curb cuts, parking stalls, loading
spaces and access aisles, and all other circulation elements including bike and
pedestrian; and the total site coverage of all circulation elements.
e. Location, designation and total area of all common open space.
f. Location, designation and total area proposed to be conveyed or dedicated for public
open space, including parks, playgrounds, school sites and recreational facilities.
g. The location of applicable site amenities, if any.
h. Proposed lots and blocks, if any and numbering system.
i. The location, use and size of structures and other land uses on adjacent properties.
j. Detailed sketches and provisions of proposed landscaping.
k. General grading and drainage plans for the developed PUD.
l. Any other information that may have been required by the Planning Commission or
Council in conjunction with the approval of the Preliminary Plan.
3. An accurate legal description of the entire area within the PUD for which final
development plan approval is sought.
4. A tabulation indicating the number of residential dwelling units and expected population.
5. Density calculations, including proposed density bonuses above the base zoning district. To
be granted increased density of residential development, the applicant must submit a
schedule of site amenities with proposed designs and standards. The applicant must
demonstrate that site amenity standards in Table 15-2 have been met to be rewarded
additional density.
6. A tabulation indicating the gross square footage, if any, of commercial and industrial floor
space by type of activity (e.g. retail or office).
DRAFT 2/11/13 17-12 Planned Unit Development
7. Preliminary architectural “typical” plans indicating use, floor plan, elevations and exterior
wall finishes of proposed building, including manufactured homes.
8. A detailed site plan, suitable for recording, showing the physical layout, design and
purpose of all streets, easements, rights of way, utility lines and facilities, lots, block,
public and common open space, general landscaping plan, structure, including mobile
homes, and uses.
9. Preliminary grading and site alteration plan illustrating changes to existing topography and
natural site vegetation. The Plan should clearly reflect the site treatment and its
conformance with the approved concept plan.
10. A soil erosion control plan acceptable to watershed districts, Department of Natural
Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service, or any other agency with review
authority, clearly illustrating erosion control measures to be used during construction and
as permanent measures.
§154.810 City Costs
The applicant shall make a deposit of a fee escrow with the City for the purpose of reimbursing any
costs directly related to a given development. Such costs include but are not limited to professional
fees and expenses incurred by the City for consultants (including but not limited to planners,
engineers, architects and attorneys) who the City determines in its sole judgment are necessary to
assist in reviewing, implementing or enforcing the provisions of this article. The amount of the
deposit, and any addition to it that the City may later require, shall be established by the Planning
Director. The City and the applicant may agree to share the costs of consultants based upon a specific
written agreement. Any funds not used by the City shall be returned to the applicant at the conclusion
of the project.
BUSINESS ITEM 4b
Planning Commission
Date: 2/11/13
Item: 4b
Business
ITEM: 2012 Community Development Department Annual Report
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
Rick Chase, Building Official
Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
______________________________________
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is asked to review and provide input on the 2012 Community
Development Departments Annual Report. The Planning Commission received a copy of
the report at the meeting on 1/14/13. Staff will present the report, highlighting the key
activities and projects that were undertaken in 2012.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The annual report is intended to summarize activities within the Community
Development Department. These activities include all building and planning activities in
2012.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission accept the 2012 annual report with the
following motion:
“Move to accept the 2012 Community Development Department Annual Report.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2012 Community Development Department Annual Report
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ...................................................................................Planning Staff
- Report by Staff ..............................................................................Planning Staff
- Questions from the Commission ....................... Chair & Commission Members
- Discussion by the Commission ......................... Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission................................ Chair & Commission Members
BUSINESS ITEM 4c
Planning Commission
Date: 2/11/13
Item: 4c
Business
ITEM: Planning Commission 2013 Work Plan
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
______________________________________
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to provide input on a draft work plan for 2013
for the Planning Department and Commission. The attached work plan represents a
broad overview of the projects that are expected to be undertaken by either Staff or the
Commission during the current calendar year, and includes an initial attempt by Staff to
incorporate completion goals and level of priority for each item.
The intent of the work plan is to help prioritize the projects the Planning Commission
will be reviewing in the next several months, and to also help keep the Commission
informed about the projects that will be undertaken by Staff during the coming year. It is
expected that this will be a working document and that it will help the Commission gauge
its progress at achieving some of its goals for the year.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the proposed work plan and
discuss any items that should be included or modified from the draft document.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft – 2013 Planning Commission Work Plan
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ...................................................................................Planning Staff
- Report by Staff ..............................................................................Planning Staff
- Questions from the Commission ....................... Chair & Commission Members
- Discussion by the Commission ......................... Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission................................ Chair & Commission Members
1
2013 Planning Commission Work Plan - DRAFT
Prepared by the Lake Elmo Planning Commission: 2/11/13
Adopted by the City Council:
Key:
Status :
C – Complete
IP – In Progress
Date:
(Completion
Goal)
A – 0 to 3 months
B – 3 to 6 months
C – 6 to 9 months
D – 9 to 12 months
Admin: Staff Projects/Initiatives
PL: Priority Level (1-5 with 1 being the highest priority)
Project and Description Date
(Months)
PLStatus
ZONING INITIATIVES
Zoning Map Updates
• Adopt map changes necessary to implement Comprehensive
Plan amendments for I-94
A 1 IP
• Adopt map changes necessary to implement Comprehensive
Plan amendments for Village
B 1
• General map updates and corrections D 4
Zoning Permit Tracking
• Develop system for tracking of planning and zoning permits,
including Conditional Use Permits, Interim Use Permits,
Variances, Planned Developments, and other applications
D 3
Zoning Text Amendments (Zoning Code Update)
• Village Mixed Use Zoning District A 1 IP
• Rural Zoning Districts B 2 IP
• Performance Standards C 2
• Accessory Buildings C 3
• Tree Preservation and Protection B 2
• Adequate Public Facilities C 3
Zoning Text Amendments (General)
• Outdoor Lighting Ordinance Revisions D 4
• Exterior Storage D 3
• Outdoor Wood Burning Furnaces D 5
• Domestic Farm Animals (keeping of chickens, bees, goats,
and other small animals)
C 3
2
Design Standards Manual
• Complete draft design standards manual with illustrative
documentation
A 1
Form-based Code
• Draft form-based code or hybrid ordinance to guide
development within the Village Planning Area
B 1
• Incorporate design standards from Design Standards Manual
as part of form-based code
B 2
Engineering Standards Manual
• Finalize development manual describing the City’s
engineering standards for private and public projects
A 1 IP
Permit Software Implementation
• Install and begin using PermitWorks software to issue and
track building permits
A 2
• Purchase and install Planning Module to track planning and
zoning applications
B 3
Sign Code Update
• Review sign code for consistency with new zoning districts
and economic development goals and objectives
D 3
Subdivision Ordinance
• Update public land dedication requirements for new sewered
zoning districts
A 1
• Review ordinance for consistency with ongoing zoning
amendments
B 2
Development Reviews
• Lennar residential subdivision EAW, preliminary plat and final
plat
C 2
PLANNING INITIATIVES
Village Area Planning
• Complete Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan
Amendment related to Village Planning Area
A 1
• Submit Comp Plan Amendment to adjacent communities and
Met Council for review
A 1
• Formal adoption of Village Comprehensive Plan Amendment B 1
• Adopt general changes to land use plan to support Village
Area Plans
B 2
• Develop policy for consideration of requests to expand uses
in proposed sewer service area
C 4
3
I-94/10th Street Corridor Planning
• Formal adoption of I-94 Corridor Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
A 1
General Comprehensive Planning
• Review Comp Plan for consistency with I-94 Corridor and
Village land use plan amendments
C 3
• Consider sustainability section as part land use updates or as
a separate element of the Comprehensive Plan
C 3
• Consider amendments related to properties guided for RAD
that are less than 40 acres in size
D 4
• Review individual projects for compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan
C 3
• Achieve 10-20% quantitative easing in Met Council REC unit
mandates and extend deadlines to 2040
D 1 IP
Lake Elmo Theming Project (with Damon Farber Associates)
• Development of a “community theme” that produces
continuity and identity between the three major planning
areas and emphasis sustainability
B 1 IP
Park Planning
• Create a master plan for all City parks, provide assistance to
Parks Commission as needed
D 3
• Review park plan for I-94 Corridor and Village with Park
Commission
A 2 IP
• Conduct comprehensive mapping of existing private and
public trail systems (using GPS where appropriate)
D 4
• Identify priority trail segments for implementation, consider
revisions to trail plans
D 3
Capital Improvement Plan
• Planning Commission review of 2013-2017 Capital
Improvement Plan for consistency with the Comprehensive
Plan
D 2
General Planning Studies
• Identify and review research associated with septic system
impacts on lakes and waterbodies
D 5
• Conduct review of 201 (community) septic system policies
and management practices. Develop system for proper
oversight, billing, and maintenance of community systems.
D 5 IP
• Prepare study of septic systems in the Village Planning Area;
work with Washington County on interim development plan
for properties to be served with public sewer service.
C 3
4
Economic Development Support
• Provide support and assistance to City Administrator as
needed for economic development activities
D 3
• Maintain list of business in Lake Elmo on City web site D 5
Buberl/Nass Detachment
• Work on appeal of detachment case at appellate level C 2
ADMINISTRATIVE INITIATIVES
Building Division
• Monitor status of staffing within building inspection
department; consider staffing needs in 2012 and beyond
C 3
Gateway Corridor Commission
• Provide staff support for Council until City representative is
selected
A 3
Permit Tracking Software
• Complete move of planning file system to PermitWorks
software
A 3
Code Enforcement
• Follow updated code enforcement program with the Building
Inspector as the City’s code enforcement officer
B 3
File Archiving and Management
• Scan Planning and Building Department files into the City
laserfische system
D 3
• Scan plat maps and project plans into system C 3
Engineering Projects
• Provide planning assistance as needed for regional trunk
sewer project
A 2 IP
Policy and Procedures Review
• Streamline and improve policies and procedures for the
handling of routine matters (variances, site plan review,
setbacks, etc…)
C 1 IP