HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Packet 01-24-11NOTICE TI
The City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission will conduct a meeting on
Monday, January 24, 2011, a17 :00 p.m.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Approve Agenda
3. Approve Minutes
a. None.
4. Public Hearing
a. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT: Rezoning for two properties off of 27`h and
28 "h Street North from Rural Residential to R -1.
5. Business Item
a. Proposed I -94 and Village Area Draft Timeline
b. Exterior Storage Work Group
6. Updates (Verbal)
a. City Council Updates
b. Staff Updates
i. Zoning District Update— Progress Report
ii. Community Garden Workshop
c. Commission Concerns
7. Adjourn
Planning Commission
Date: 1/24111
Public Hearing
Item: 4a
ITEM: Hold a public hearing to consider a zoning map amendment application to
allow two properties located at 27th and 28th Street North to be rezoned
from RR — Rural Residential to R -1 — PID 21- 029 -21 -14 -0003 and 21 -029-
21 -14 -0002.
SUBMITTED BY: Kelli Matzek, City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning Commission is being asked to conduct a public hearing and consider a zoning map
amendment request from the Lake Elmo Bank to rezone two properties currently zoned RR-
Rural Residential to R -1 One Family Residential which reduces the minimum lot size requirement
from 10 acres to 1.5 acres.
The Valley Branch Watershed District has expressed interest in having the culvert under the
existing driveway removed due to resulting flooding on properties north of the culvert. In addition
the existing driveway floods in a 10 year rain event which causes concern for access in the event
emergency personnel need to access the site. Instead, staff is suggesting future access for the
two sites, if considered buildable, be constructed off of 27m Street North. Due to minor
constraints such as existing city infrastructure and neighboring driveway locations, a shared
driveway off of 27" Street North may be something the city would wish to explore as a condition
of approval.
In reviewing the unique site, city staff has also approached Lake Elmo Bank with the idea of
trading land area. The city owns an unimproved, unused piece of property adjacent to the
applicant's property. Staff is suggesting the commission review the idea of trading land area so
the city may take over a portion of Raleigh Creek as it may serve as a potential future (partial)
trail connection between the Lake Elmo Regional Park Reserve and Tablyn Park.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
• There are significant surface water easements as well as floodplains and a setback
to Raleigh Creek, primarily on the northern property.
• The two properties are currently vacant. The southern property previously had a
dilapidated home that was torn down by Lake Elmo Bank in 2010.
r-W900TIT19,51V57-11001
Staff is recommending approval of the zoning map amendment to allow the rezoning as it is in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan with the following conditions.
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Introduction .................................................. ..........................Kelli Matzek, City Planner
- Report by staff ........................................ ............................... Kelli Matzek, City Planner
Questions from the Commission .... ............................... Chair & Commission Members
Applicant Comments ..................... ............................... ..........................Chair facilitates
Questions of the Applicant.. — — . ....... ........................... Chair & Commission Members
Open the Public Hearing ............................... ............................... ..........................Chair
Close the Public Hearing ............................... ............................... ..........................Chair
Call for a motion .................................................... ............................... Chair Facilitates
Discussion of Commission on the motion ............. ............................... Chair Facilitates
Action by the Planning Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
ATTACHMENTS (3):
1. Staff Report
2. Area Map
3. Proposed Site Plan
City of Lake Elmo Planning Department
Zoning Map Amendment Review
70: Planning Commission
From: Kelli Matzek, City Planner
Meeting Date: 1/24/11
Applicant: Dan Raleigh, Lake Elmo Bank
Owner: Lake Elmo Bank
Location: 2 Properties — 21- 029 -21 -14 -0003; 21- 029 -21 -14 -0002 (2742 Ivy Ave)
toning: RR — Rural Residential
Request Mr. Raleigh, on behalf of the current owner, Lake Elmo Bank, is requesting two
properties located at the end of 27"' Street North and 28`" Street North, be rezoned
from Rural Residential which has a 10 acre minimum lot size, to R -1 which has a one
and a half acre minimum lot size. The proposed rezoning would result in two
potentially buildable lots where one was previously used for single family residential
purposes and the other as a vacant property through which the driveway was built.
Site Data:
Background
Information:
A minor lot line adjustment is also proposed which would shift a small amount of land
from one parcel to the other. The proposed property line shift would not impact the
ability to build on the property; the ability to build on the lot will be contingent on the
ability to construct a functioning septic system on the site. A lot line adjustment can
be processed administratively, but is being mentioned at this time due to the rezoning
request.
Property Identification No.
21- 029 -21 -14 -0003
21- 029 -21 -14 -0002
Vacation Review
Existing Area
1.92 Acres
2.45 Acres
Use
Vacant /Floodplain
Former Homesite /Vacant
The southern, larger property was previously used for residential purposes. After the
bank became owners of the property, the dilapidated single family home was torn
down and the lot now remains vacant. The driveway was left intact and utilities are
still available to this site.
The northern property, owned by the same homeowner prior to the bank's ownership,
{r,
is currently vacant except for the driveway that serviced the southern property's
previous home. This driveway meanders through the southern portion of the north
property and over to 28 "' Street North. Raleigh Creek runs through the western side of
this property and therefore is subject to not only a setback to the creek, but must
adhere to the floodplain regulations where applicable. The northern property also has
a significant surface water drainage easement that staff is currently researching to
assess any impact on that property and it's ability to be used for residential purposes.
A culvert exists under the driveway that previously served the house on the southern
property. This culvert was enlarged a number of years ago as flooding occurred on the
north side of the culvert due to ice damming. Because of the location of Raleigh
Creek, the flat topography and the culvert, ice continues to form behind the culvert
and causes flooding on the northern property as well as on other properties upstream.
The properties have significant, but manageable slopes on the west side, near the 27`i'
Street North cul -de -sac. Review by the City Engineer confirms that driveways could
be added off the cul -de -sac and have less than a ten percent grade.
The property is just north of the Lake Elmo Regional Park Reserve, a significant park
owned and managed by Washington County.
Both properties are located within School District 622.
Review Comments:
Planning I Comprehensive Plan, Existing Neighborhood
Issues: The two properties are currently zoned RR — Rural Residential, but are guided for NC
— Neighborhood Conservation in the Comprehensive Plan. This land use coincides
with the R -1 zoning district, which is being requested by the applicant. Therefore, the
rezoning of the properties from RR to R -1 would be in conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
The R -1 zoning is also consistent with the properties directly to the west and in the
neighborhood to the east of the two properties. The two adjacent neighborhoods are
on generally smaller lots and are developed with single family residential homes.
Site Access
As more thoroughly described on page four of this report, the Valley Branch
Watershed District (VBWD) and city staff are interested in having the access for the
two properties be removed from 28`h Street North and instead be located off of 27`h
Street North (the end of a cul -de -sac).
In addition, the removal of the culvert would reduce the flooding north of the culvert
onto private properties. Because the existing driveway floods in a 10 -year rain event,
city staff is interested in seeing this driveway removed and replaced on higher ground
„, Ir I,,
— 21" Street. in the event the existing driveway is flooded, it is a concern that public
safety vehicles may not be able to access the home(s) in cases of emergency. In
addition, the relocation of the driveways to 27h Street North would be beneficial to
school district 622 for bussing purposes, should that service be used in the future.
Existing city improvements such as a fire hydrant and the current configuration of a
neighbor's driveway are existing conditions that need to be considered if and when
two driveways would be added to serve the two properties. Although a shared
driveway is something the city does not encourage due to potential future conflicts, it
may be something the city would like to further explore with the applicant. This may
mean requiring an easement and maintenance agreement or an extension of the city's
road right -of -way.
Although not an option preferred by city staff or the VBWD, if the existing driveway
were to be left as-is, an access easement would be needed as it must cross through the
northern property to reach 28t' Street North. This is a situation not preferred by city
staff as similar situations have been found to foster maintenance issues, even with a
maintenance agreement on file.
Land Exchange
City staff is suggesting consideration of a land exchange between the city, the VBWD
and the property owner. The northern property has a portion of land that is located
within PEMA identified floodplains and is therefore unbuildable. In addition, Raleigh
Creek flows through the eastern side of this property. Staff is suggesting the city
request that area of the property be turned over to the city so as to leave an option for a
possible future trail connection between Tablyn Park and the Lake Elmo Regional
Park Reserve.
The city currently owns a 0.35 acre parcel directly adjacent to the northern property.
Staff has speculated that property may have been acquired at some point with the
intention of someday connecting 27th and 28t1' Streets, to add a cur -de -sac onto 28th
Street or for a turnaround to be constructed at the end of 28th Street. In speaking with
the City Engineer, he does not believe any of those scenarios would occur. Therefore,
a portion of that land may be of interest to the current or future landowner. The two
land areas identified are roughly similar in size.
Staff would suggest maintaining a portion of the property adjacent to 28th Street North
for snow storage purposes.
The VBWD may also be interested in exchanging, selling, or giving land currently
owned by them for additional land or easements to other more sensitive areas.
Engineer The City Engineer's comments are included in full as an attachment to this report. A
Comments: summary of his comments are below:
- Engineering would be in support of moving the access to the properties off of
27t' Street North.
- Water service to the second lot would need to be addressed.
T�i it t` +.tt'� }tLIFi"
Wa !ad, Der '>tt1:• .e„
Proposed and secondary septic systems must meet all setback requirements.
- Areas of adjoining discrepancy with the adjoining plats should be addressed.
- City owned properties should be reviewed for their public purpose and should
be modified as necessary with this proposal.
DNR/UBWD No comments were received from the DNR.
Comments:
The Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) owns two properties adjacent to this
property — a thin property that wraps around the south and east side of the southern
property and one that lies between the two properties. The VBWD also owns and
manages the culvert allowing Raleigh Creek to flow underneath the existing driveway
that connects to 28`i' Street North. As mentioned previously, flooding occurs north of
the culvert onto private property as the physical characteristics of the land and creek in
combination with the culvert, allow ice to back up the water flow in the winter and
spring.
The VBWD is interested in removing the culvert to reduce the flooding that occurs.
Although some flooding will stilt occur and federally identified floodplains exist, the
removal of the culvert would likely reduce the impact on both the existing neighbor's
property as well as the applicant's northern property. In order to remove the culvert,
the existing driveway would need to be removed and alternative access for the two
properties would need to be addressed.
The relocation to 271h Street would allow the removal of the culvert and would thereby
reduce flooding on adjacent properties. Staff believes the removal of the culvert
would serve a public service by reducing flooding upstream.
Conclusion: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the
rezoning request with conditions.
In addition, staff is looking for a separate recommendation from the commission on
proceeding with requiring relocation of the access point for both properties to 27i7,
Street North.
The last item staff is looking for a recommendation on is the opportunity to exchange
property with the landowner.
Conclusion:
The applicant is seeking approval of a rezoning request for two properties located at
the end of 27t1 Street North and 281' Street North from RR to R -1.
r �
�;'x,p
Commission The Planning Commission may consider the following options or taking action on this
Options: request:
A) Approve the rezoning based on the findings drafted by Staff or other additional
information that is presented at the public hearing;
B) Deny the request based on findings (...cite findings...)
The Planning Commission may recommend the City Council direct staff to work with
the applicants to determine future driveway location options off of 27"' Street North
(suggested as a condition of approval below).
The Planning Commission may recommend the City Council direct staff to work with
the applicants to identify suitable land areas for exchange of ownership (suggested as a
condition of approval below).
Staff Rec: ! Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request based on the following:
1) The proposed zoning is in conformance with the guidance of the
Comprehensive Plan.
2) The neighborhoods adjacent to and nearby the two properties are already zoned
R -1. The rezoning of the properties to R -1 to allow single family residential
homes would be in conformance with the existing neighborhood.
Provided the following conditions are met
1) The applicants must provide documentation to the satisfaction of the City
Attorney that all property line discrepancies are resolved.
2) Any future building permit is subject to a full review at the time of submission.
Staff can not determine at this time that the properties are able to be built on
without additional city approvals such as a variance.
3) The existing driveway must be removed from the northern property. All future
access for both properties shall be from 27`x' Street North.
4) The applicants shall provide a driveway access easement for a proposed shared
driveway.
5) The applicants shall work with the City on a potential land trade.
Approval To approve the request, the Planning Commission is asked to use the following motion
Motion as a guide:
Template:
I move to recommend approval of the rezoning request from the bake Elmo
Bank to rezone two properties off of 27th Street North from Rural Residential to
R -I with the conditions outlined in the staff report .... (use staffs findings provided
above or cite your own)
cc: Dan Raleigh, Lake Elmo Bank
Bob Clark, Lynsky & Clark
«,
Zoning Amendment
Oj.
Far 6e
yyD
1,W
0 FF
TILIFF y "I car
_ -ZYY '\ Op0
IF PARCEL B
/
1
'O m
bGc
R
t e
Y..
\ aAN n
FIT
V eeOEasEti
ITT` f O 224.93
\ - A\ p4(1POtf0 URIVfNAY PR
y_
\ \\mr
IK
t£
xN V' a its /, 4
T%
'E /I It . to IT — 7\
osA
o
R
i
Y,
W
Lot f
fly
11HLR Art
F,
rej
..,vrv[xi
iP
9p
as
DRAM
o
µIGN
ULSTER VALVE
3. FOUND MONUMENTS DENOTED BY HOLM 'ARE
APPROXIMATELY SHOWN PER SLUGHOY By ART HOiM GATED
d
P
I
S s l
vP'E
t£
xN V' a its /, 4
T%
'E /I It . to IT — 7\
osA
o
R
i
Y,
N u 0
f
i
to
\ \
h
\ i,C fly as 1/1
OP'
r
12 "t]' W
U u Ul;
Gar
O F 11 S
3
Le, E,
Ell
F.
-
W
Lot f
L 1CLUDOS AR£ BASED ON IIIIII GION CWMY
F,
t Ir l
I Is' O 11 m r✓ nl /
ryArcx easN
In
`.A
DRAM
.I", toorrillf
µIGN
ULSTER VALVE
3. FOUND MONUMENTS DENOTED BY HOLM 'ARE
APPROXIMATELY SHOWN PER SLUGHOY By ART HOiM GATED
d
Of Y'21 HE 1972. iIN A NOTED ON HS SURVEY TIA't
I
9! `v
vP'E
Sn"And
4, mU YEAR FLOCK ELEVATION PROVmfD BY THE Cm Of
NORTH
LAKE ELMO ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
'V an
0 40 RO
/
van
O
\T,M
Al ,
`\
PROPOSED PROPERTY ONE Y
\
I �
v
L -p-
�
LP-Y '.:.
F9 s T
.WG
-,
/ e t
v4 _
ISO ood 11 ,
IF
F,
TO
R1 or
a A
1
a v
RG
F�
N u 0
f
i
to
\ \
h
\ i,C fly as 1/1
OP'
r
12 "t]' W
U u Ul;
Gar
O F 11 S
3
Le, E,
Ell
F.
-
W
Lot f
L 1CLUDOS AR£ BASED ON IIIIII GION CWMY
F,
COORDINATES NA0 1983_
ryArcx easN
In
`.A
DRAM
.I", toorrillf
µIGN
ULSTER VALVE
3. FOUND MONUMENTS DENOTED BY HOLM 'ARE
APPROXIMATELY SHOWN PER SLUGHOY By ART HOiM GATED
i
Of Y'21 HE 1972. iIN A NOTED ON HS SURVEY TIA't
I
9! `v
vP'E
Sn"And
4, mU YEAR FLOCK ELEVATION PROVmfD BY THE Cm Of
NORTH
LAKE ELMO ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
'V an
0 40 RO
6
van
Al ,
`\
PROPOSED PROPERTY ONE Y
\
I �
L -p-
\4\
\
SO,
W
Lot f
L 1CLUDOS AR£ BASED ON IIIIII GION CWMY
COORDINATES NA0 1983_
ryArcx easN
In
`.A
DRAM
a
µIGN
ULSTER VALVE
3. FOUND MONUMENTS DENOTED BY HOLM 'ARE
APPROXIMATELY SHOWN PER SLUGHOY By ART HOiM GATED
v'.` r` q
Of Y'21 HE 1972. iIN A NOTED ON HS SURVEY TIA't
I
9! `v
vP'E
Sn"And
4, mU YEAR FLOCK ELEVATION PROVmfD BY THE Cm Of
NORTH
LAKE ELMO ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
'V an
0 40 RO
6
van
Al ,
`\
PROPOSED PROPERTY ONE Y
L -p-
�
LP-Y '.:.
F9 s T
.WG
-,
His /EN
v4 _
ISO ood 11 ,
IF
�I N
I�
IP
Al
L a EXISTING LEGAL DI 11
Held 1 - Ready TI L yt p yC N 3285 d , May
12009
PARCEL
""I., p fl Southeast 'a or h- Famoter a $ 2 11 cyntm, ,, A 9 e 11, 1. htl -ANDR, _mmumem, a, items
US III, life M1 I' f h. Its Fall S fi FI Northeast ! Sol romp, blol, Sell al g slid 1, line 461f n
Users lorelt l y A If,, trial if parallel to she earth Box of , Sordeast fami Of N Ghana, r 61 f
1 hu "Reason 91 r66aa 5 martil,, to to, ]r491f_ ?Nbt here lots eer
a Z1,7lbon parallel is and 199 9-ee Santa Orzaa rtn lma of earn r.I, chance Dml last gn1e[ ne porrt Of a egnen¢
FXtept", HOURNAR a 11 111'It ally w52h -z ITARRIN 11-1 the Somh al East fines.
PARCELS
Ali that part nf the N n Quarter of s 21 Township 29Range a described as FIJI— Beginning an the N h n
Schreyer Q 'R a Of 11 Ann dom, Emons, dean 1 9 1. SUIT ' n f low nea In
R II.I M1 North l Thereof 336f M1 by 6,11, gl 66tl 9 5 M1 qh 2" Fe Lon
n.N of r aS n AN r by rte q of 77 she right 120 U, n non.tneru.n,,, bya
a.l - t.1, of a4 a9 I crounill, to 11, .till sell fall I the P (b. ning ins
Exceptng therefrom a 161,2 Ford strip blis is reserved along the East llu.
Except She fianderat d mll ST.,pay thereof Allt part of n Southeast Searle, of N h broxe, of 5 I L , Imernam, 29N 1
W,wA 21 ""at. wandaut C y M it b d Do wear, S.-Sm'Clourround, M1 A 1, f S M1 Q'
(N M1' Q ft 21 np]9
Range 21 West shormeSolath along the searydrumR, d 'ISI fast b 5 M162
tlg d hunces As, , d of 386! M1. Pento of beginning of M1 desciptionj h South ME deg U minutes West a
ORCUP, of IEIR nor Islas S hl]a9 20 monme, Last a disarbe of Sm2 . North 62 d gree 21 mmures A distance
n5ORf n North ap 111 es u h 1681,. d1 f2a feet: M1 a North 4U ae9rees 32 ntesWezta
tl o1214 ku IF 'ntofn9 o
Arco Aatp Ofl a33r In wIdI1 III, 1 U1 e r n P a1 eby hurt vd, a adE. v 165 net wesmr me
Nor[M and SOnS 1 f.I—se III— lt antl i2T _IIp In N."', .,as 11 sea,,, ml 1,T es [.,.I'd antl, leery. for
rally purpazes
N`n m,YllFR AI.., or, ofDo, Ill et Castle, o D.rlleazt CHAIR, .11 . 2,ract he 29 ,e 92 a t n d
9 at the Northeast corner of ns last Qnaaer of Northeast Quarter rs 1 n29Dan,, 2 f
SKdrrn[ary h S II d running M1 , M16].degrees a0 1. W.- d f 86F p f So
beolrnlEd,,n description _F Ig5 2deq Im 1 to dl 5feetth M1 learn It nr
Inures Eai[ tl fsor F. RICH filtlg 0 E d f12S( thence Nord
Suandpanlll tosaltl SeR On
Ile by pro e[ dstar<Df sL.3f .o [he0 Flat ofbg nng,auord,Ot 1 n[etlStates fwnmmen[Swvey [nereo(WasNngton
County. Mlnnezam.
C PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
ONE, FOLLOWING
CK A AND PROPOSED CTI LEGAL OLCP1vnoNt ARE BASED ON A PROPOSED PICRIC)
DESCRIPTION TO BErlsram2E FOR THE
ESISTINL PARCEL AAND RARCEt B_ THfSf LELAt UFSCRIPTIONS ARE NOT RECURD.1
080O$EO PARCEL A
All III of the N r -a rt r sR z T Pp Ed R' 9 21 Par, be 9 Comply M Easte A
COMMENCING n r. f
Oil N rmeAV Nard Theral An aNsudded assume or S ,h UU deal. 06 minutes Sl
as 1 gn r 1, dN n o a an6r n n r s M1 e
Q rn 1 a ',i v zags or, 45 —mods w 6 of 2S.1 9r s mGz
g 3 n 59 a w t al of 200.31 feet thenee South 21 d g 1 IRPW o 1 —race, Spa A al me of
19.3 the POINT Of BEGINNING , they, Nort, 6249 39 9 or law A m !Haan! Is newest
me n HOOF! f tlS a 1, 1 n n C h S nHU.g a6 1_ 1, West
apply L of she 18,50 fact a distance If Sao 12 'all 1 hl fn Ruth l65U OFF f 11, tharb Hll.111,
S n
Quartet of I ..,,.,all n h S-1111 BE B111111 21 s\ tl Mi Slany am M1 lose of are .,bit
U.D) feet a distance ad 152131 n Parly lae of TRLYN PARK END ADDITION, M1 North 2 1 deg 6 minutes 11
d' West ran, all RADIO line If N IN PARK END ADDITIO N , distance of 473,97 feet 11 Ire ' 1 f _fiat
heats load B81,r 16 nfintme 21 scors, ca the Iy IIegummaj hence Nain RR them ... 'A ferule 21 setonl,
East a UnAnca 12 14 91 ON more or Isss b till ROUND OF BEGINNING,
PR RIFIRSP Rc,L
AN In,, Aff Of The Sholder, teacher of S 21 lossomm, 29 Islas 21 whalumpip, rRom, H morn al as
COMMENCING at tf f ,, N M1 Quarter thence bearml of S 00 d,qr,,s 06 numan, 51
d We', '1 D 1 1' He AT at, a' tl !1,31].21, ! 1,h s n z
R North Q n N.M12deg 061'1 5 SE WAIT a tl I Fer 5 beef so the POINT OF
aa1 N1 C'. n s h61 Open, 34 fill Sw .... rids Well a distance - f2DU3I fact t.. All, 2 degrees 17 lnntez Os
Last a distance If 131 3 n sold, ds NegrIes 16 dralles, 21 arcane, 'III I d- '11 URI , be
ry line of TARYN Art END ADA NA, thence North 21 9 6 females 05 5eamms West alre, and lartarly tiny of
TABLYN PARK END ADOTION I distance If 214 64 feet to In, n In, north t n A 1 Aul FOUR,, of the
NO, 'heart 'Q memar, art if 54 degress 37 themm, Am trends Ill A d n r32U ( el tell that
I'll, NFrll R2 d g OG Thims, 9 , from the pant at BEGINNING in ence $onto 42 dtal ass OF nna[ez 45 seconds
it sdesk.[. a- 21902 fall to the P01 T01 SCINNING
AREASD11.OF OLD PARCELS A 6 B � 191898 S 11, a14.,0 Attes mail or Tess
PROVOteO NEW PARCEL A -11 or'I O3. 2s oes more or less
PROPOS ED FAR PARCEL. a i RS] 88 Sp. It 19C Ares mom or fees
SURVEY NOTES:
L 1CLUDOS AR£ BASED ON IIIIII GION CWMY
COORDINATES NA0 1983_
ryArcx easN
2. '[HERE MAY 50ME UNDERGROUND I I ILI T RECAS EIEe TRIC,
DRAM
INC. NOT SHOWN OR LODT50.
µIGN
ULSTER VALVE
3. FOUND MONUMENTS DENOTED BY HOLM 'ARE
APPROXIMATELY SHOWN PER SLUGHOY By ART HOiM GATED
v'.` r` q
Of Y'21 HE 1972. iIN A NOTED ON HS SURVEY TIA't
I
EFIST RI
ING LEGAL DESCRIPTION REST All TIME Of HIS
vP'E
Sn"And
4, mU YEAR FLOCK ELEVATION PROVmfD BY THE Cm Of
NORTH
LAKE ELMO ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
0 40 RO
�110
SYMBOLS:
o
ryArcx easN
cANHOLS
LVERT
DRAM
5 MtYE0.
FENCE
µIGN
ULSTER VALVE
CONCRETE
UT i L1TY MILE
LIGHT POLE
• U_NOUTS POUND
1- iEYER'OR
PENN lbroma N
GAS VALVE
A DENOTES SET 1 2 IRON
PIPE If RLS 75]18
OVERHEAR WINES
SELL
TO BE SET
UTILITY NOTE:
NO I)NDERG0.011N0 tl \ILI[IES WERE LOCATED AS PA0.l'
OF rHlslust
CAi r eager YOU DID'
Y Gopher State One Call
vR TTI
01
A11.1 ALO-1,raysel
1.' I BOO IR 161
LAKE BLmo BANK'.
DOWNER:
LAKE ELMO BANK
C/O DAN RAL IOH
Lake DIND OffisR
II4GS ADISFOANG10h
Pas Of fill was Rol
Lake Elmo MN 5SO42
651,111.9161
Fax 651,773 .4739
CITY -COUNTY
WASHINGTON, COUNTY
SEAL
8
THE 0 INNE50TA L`pF3 NOT
RWUR4 All SF L.
REVISIONS.
DATE EIIIIDN
ellsells
MyAiS
S 1 IIwRsE DRVWAII
CERTIFICATION
..ave,
till, It 11, f i
ri
e ez peA�staU rva
Dal 3_11D
PROJECT LOCATION: �y
G
IVY AVF__ N_
PID4f2102921140003
PID #2102921140002
V
®. edA I.
2U0 Fall hoatna s IRM
6111we1ES_ MN 66082
r
7 1 "6512]589 E9
ex ,E1. E768E76
aanLN
va1,
n1
CORNERSTONE
LJ1N0 SURVEYING. INC
IT
1.11 mal ARILf
1101111 ND. IL I I'll
CERTIFICATE OF
C
Planning Commission
Date: 1/24/11
Comp Plan Update Timeline
Item: 5a
ITEM: Review Draft Timeline for Village Area and 1 -94 Area Comprehensive Plan Updates
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Director of Planning
REVIEWED BY: Kelli Matzek, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to review and provide feedback on proposed timelines
associated with future updates to the Comprehensive Plan for the Village and 1 -94 Corridor Planning
Areas (the portions of Lake Elmo that are planned for future sewered development). Staff envisions that
the City's development of updates to the Comprehensible Plan for each of the proposed sewered
development areas will occur as a separate planning process, but with some similarities in order to help
staff better manage these complex projects.
Included for review by the Planning Commission are three separate documents as follows:
A general project outline /timeline for the 1 -94 Corridor
A general project outline /timeline for the Village Area
A graphical representation of the proposed timeline, with both project areas shown on the same
page.
At this time, Staff is seeking general feedback from the Commission regarding the proposed project
schedules. The schedule will then be submitted to the City Council for further review, and will be one of
the primary discussion points that Staff will review with the Council at its annual retreat in February of this
year.
Pease note that the latter portions of the Village planning timeline will need to be expanded upon at some
point in the future. Staff would like to have this timeline completed prior to organizing the stakeholder and
work groups.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the proposed timelines and discuss any
comments or suggested revisions at its meeting.
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Introduction ........
....Kyle Klatt, Director of Planning
Report by staff ..................... Kyle Klatt, Director of Planning /Kelli Matzek, City Planner
Questions /Comments from the Planning Commission ................Planning Commission
ATTACHMENTS:
• 1 -94 Area Draft Timeline /Process
• Village Area Draft Timeline /Review Process
0 Graphical Timeline
A Draft Timeline /Process __qq
JANUARY
- Identify Stakeholders Group
- Identify Technical Committee
- Identify Work Group (subset of Stakeholders Group; 7 -10 people)
FEBRUARY
- First meeting of Stakeholders Group
Meeting One — Existing Conditions
Purpose: What is there now? What does the Comp Plan currently
say? What are the Met Council requirements? What is happening
in adjacent communities? What are the land uses adjacent to the
areas in developing Lake Elmo?
- Report back to Planning Commission, City Council
MARCH
- Hold Open House
• Invite stakeholder group, commissioners (Planning, Parks, Environmental,
etc.), general public
• Seek input on Vision — If we can't all agree (at Least in part) where we are
headed, getting there will never "end."
First meeting of Work Group
Meeting One — What is the Vision?
Purpose: Receive information received from open house. What is
the end goal for the Area South of I 01 Street? A bustling
commercial node? Stable, safe neighborhoods? A regional draw
such as ? How does the city want to be seen from I -94?
What is the community identity?
APRIL
- Report back to Planning Commission, City Council
o Get consensus on Vision for Area South of I Ott, Street
- First meeting of Technical Committee
Purpose: What services need to be discussed? What do current
plans call for? What other plans are out there (school district,
Washington County, etc.)? Gather information.
• Schools
• Streets
• Sewer
• Storm Sewer /Surface Water
• Water
• Fire
9W
• Police
• Parks
• Trails
Second meeting of Stakeholders Group
Meeting Two — Report on Work To Date
Purpose: Report on established Vision for South of I Ot" Street
Area. Report on work done by Technical Committee, City Staff.
Identify upcoming meetings, work, and options for more public
input.
Second meeting of Work Group
Meeting Two — Figuring out the Details — Commercial Focus
Purpose: Revisiting the existing land use map:
- Does residential housing along I -94 coincide with the agreed
upon vision? Does it make sense? If the land continues to be
designated for residential along I -94, what does the city want to do
with existing businesses?
- Does a corporate campus at the corner of Manning Avenue and I-
94 make sense? Is there a market?
- Third meeting of Work Group
JUNE
Meeting Three — Figuring out the Details — Residential Focus
Purpose: Revisiting the existing land use map:
- Does residential housing along I -94 coincide with the agreed
upon vision? Does it make sense? If the land continues to be
designated for residential along I -94, what does the city want to do
with existing businesses?
- Do the property owners at the corner of Lake Elmo Avenue and
I Oth Street continue to want part of their properties guided for
sewer? Is it feasible? Where are their existing homes and septic
systems?
- Buffering existing neighborhoods (III -3 of Comp Plan identifies
requirements)
- Property guided for PF, but currently zoned R -3. Should that be
changed?
Report back to Planning Commission, City Council
o Review work done by Work Group, Technical Committee /City Staff
Third meeting of Stakeholders Group
Meeting Three — Report on Work To Date
Purpose: Report on work done by Work Group - where land use
types should be located (generically residential and commercial).
um
Second meeting of Technical Committee
Purpose: Given the established vision and ideas of what land use
types should be where, do services need to be reevaluated? Are
there any red flags? Additional services needed? Where
appropriate?
• Schools
• Streets
• Sewer
• Storm Sewer /Surface Water
• Water
• Fire
• Police
• Parks
• Trails
Fourth meeting of Work Group
Meeting Four — How to Implement — Creating a Future Land
Use Map
Purpose: Given the established vision, the additional services
needed (school, fire, police, etc.) and the ideas for appropriate
residential and commercial locations — create a Future Land Use
Map.
AUGUST
- Fifth meeting of Work Group
Meeting Five — A More Detailed Future Land Use Map
Purpose: Revisit the Draft Future Land Use Map and give more
detailed review to what type of uses would be appropriate in which
commercial areas. What level of density would be more
appropriate for residentially guided properties.
SEPTEMBER
- Hold Open House
• Invite stakeholder group, commissioners (Planning, Parks, Environmental,
etc.), general public
• Seek input on Detailed Future Land Use Map
Report back to Planning Commission, City Council
o Review work done by Work Group, Stakeholders Group, Technical
Committee /City Staff, Information firom Open House
OCTOBER
- Sixth meeting of Work Group
Meeting Six — How Do We Get to the Vision? View Draft
Ordinance Language and Design Standards
Purpose Revisit the Draft Future Land Use Map and give more
detailed review to what type of uses would be appropriate in which
commercial areas. What level of density would be more
appropriate for residentially guided properties.
Park Commission Meeting
o Review draft Future Land Use Map and More Detailed Plans
Planning Commission Meeting
• Review draft Future Land Use Map and More Detailed Plans
• Hold public hearing to amend the Comprehensive Plan
NOVEMBER
- City Council Workshop
o Review draft Future Land Use Map and More Detailed Plans
- City Council Meeting
o Approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Staff sends Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Metropolitan Council for approval.
Village Area Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Timeline /Review Process
Prepared By: lake Elmo Planning Department
1/24/11
2011
Task /Meeting Summary
January
Establish Stakeholder Group
• All potential stakeholders
Create Village Comprehensive Plan Update Work Group
• Including some members of the stakeholder group
Create Technical Review Committee
• Comprised of same members as recommended in the I -94
review rocess
February
Stakeholder Meeting
• Planning Update - History of recent planning efforts
• Discuss overall Village housing unit count with update
regarding City Council density decision
• Review Planning Department density analysis
Work Group
• Meeting 1
• Review current plans and AUAR
• Discuss Civic /Institutional Plans and alternative
scenarios for public and semi - public uses
• Review transportation plans
• Discuss public realm (streets, parks, sidewalks, public
squares) and design options
• Storm Water Update
Planning Commission /Council Update
• Stakeholder feedback and comments
• Work group update
March
Open House #1
i Present options for civic and institutional "Community
Campus"
• General update concerning population and density
projections for the Village
• Sewer Project update
• Storm Water Planning discussion
April
Technical Committee
• Discuss Service needs in community
• Review current agency /departmental /governmental
planning efforts
Work Group
• Consider design standards and integration into the
Zoning Ordinance
• Review zoning district alternatives
• Identity preferred location for community campus
concept
• Review site design options for community campus
• Consider revised residential and open space plan with
new density projections.
• Establish preferred scale for Village area development
Planning Commission /Council Update
• Open House Review
• Review draft Land Use Plan update
May
Work Group
• Meeting 3
June
Technical Committee Meeting
Stakeholder Group
• Meeting 2
Planning Commission /Council Update
July
Work Group
• Meeting 4
August
Work Group
• Meeting 5
Plannin Commission /Council Update
September
Open House #2
October
Technical Committee Meeting
• Review AUAR Update Document for submission to EQB
Work Group
• Meeting 6
Planning Commission /Council Update
• Review Draft Comprehensive Plan Update - with
revised Land Use Plan
November
Work Group
• Meeting 7
December
Stakeholder Group
• Meeting 3
Planning Commission /Council Update
I Public Hearing - Planning Commission
Notes:
• Technical Committee meeting schedule will be timed to coincide with I -94
Planning schedule
• Additional Work Group meetings will be called on an as- needed basis
January
February March April May June July
August September October November
December January February
4�9s���rs
Stakeholders
Group large
-.
9si tg 2nd Mtg. 3rd 'Mtg,
4th M tg..
Work Group
--
_ ..
1 1
1 -94
(subset of
2nd and 3rd
I
stakeholder'
__)
1st Mt Mtg, 4th Mt
g 9
5th Mt . 6th Mtg,
9 g
Open Housew
public
;
��
Technical
-
-� -
Group
CommissionsX
City Council
�`
LEI
-
._
T w
mice Old-
Stakeholders
--
Group -large
1
1st Mtg. 2nd Mtg-
3rd Mtg.
Village
Work Group
(include
Stakeholders)
1st Mtg. 2nd Mtg. 3rd Mtg. 4th Mtg.
5th Mtg. 6th Mtg, 7th Mtg.
Open House -
MINE
-
Technical
Group
\ \
Commissions
-
City Council
v. -- " ;ti
v
} - -- fi*
t w�
t
_,..z
- -- -
Planning Commission
Date: 1/24/11
Exterior Storage Committee
Item: 5b
ITEM: Establishment of an Exterior Storage /Accessory Building Review
Committee
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Director of Planning
REVIEWED BY: Kelli Matzek, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to review and confirm the selection of three members
of the Commission to serve on a committee to further refine draft amendments to the City's
exterior storage and accessory building ordinances. These ordinances were reviewed by the
Planning Commission earlier last year, but were tabled either by the City Council or by the
Commission in order to further study each of the documents. During the course of the year, the
City reviewed several other code amendments, but did not conduct any further review of the
exterior storage and accessory building ordinances.
Due to the lack of consensus regarding the proposed exterior storage requirements, the
Commission suggested forming a work group comprised of those Commissioner's particularly
interested in exterior storage regulations to draft further revisions to the ordinance. At this time,
Staff would like to confirm which Planning Commission members would like to serve on the work
group and to begin working to prepare a final ordinance draft.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission select three members to serve on a work group
to further refine the proposed Exterior Storage and Accessory Building Ordinances.
ORDER OF BUSINESS-
- Introduction ..................................... ............................... Kyle Klatt, Director of Planning
- Report by staff.... ....... - .................................... ...... ... Kyle Klatt, Director of Planning
- Questions /Comments from the Planning Commission ................ Planning Commission
ATTACHMENTS:
'�►[diLa