HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Agenda Packet; 7-14-14
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, July 14, 2014 at 7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Approve Agenda
3. Approve Minutes
a. June 30, 2014
4. Public Hearing
a. PRELIMINARY PLAT, FINAL PLAT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT –
CM PROPERTIES 94 LP AND KWIK TRIP, INC. The Planning Commission
will hold a public hearing to consider an application from CM Properties 94 LP
and Kwik Trip, Inc. for a Preliminary and Final Plat for a gasoline station in stage
1 of the I-94 corridor. The request also includes a conditional use permit, as
gasoline stations and car washes are conditional uses in the Commercial zoning
district.
b. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT – ELIMINATE RAD-ALT LAND
USE CATEGORY. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to
consider amending the City’s Comprehensive Plan to eliminate the RAD-Alt
(Rural Area Development Alternative Density) land use category from the Future
Land Use Map and as referenced in other portions of the Comprehensive Plan.
c. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT – PERFECTING AMENDMENTS. The
Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to consider a Zoning Map
Amendment to change the zoning for several properties guided for pending
development, as well as other clean-up or perfecting amendments.
5. Business Items
a. None
6. Updates
a. City Council Updates – July 1, 2014 meeting:
i. Hammes Shoreland Variance was withdrawn by the applicant.
ii. Hunter’s Crossing Preliminary Plat passed with 15 conditions of approval.
2
iii. Eagle Point Medical Center Preliminary and Final Development plans
passed with 7 conditions of approval.
iv. Hammes Estates Preliminary Plat passed with 17 conditions of approval.
b. Staff Updates
i. Upcoming Meetings:
• July 28, 2014
• August 11, 2014
c. Commission Concerns
7. Adjourn
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of June 30, 2014
Chairman Williams called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at
7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Williams, Dodson, Larson, Dorschner and Lundgren.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Kreimer, Haggard and Morreale;
STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Klatt, City Planner Johnson and City
Administrator Zuleger.
Approve Agenda:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
Approve Minutes: June 23, 2014
M/S/P: Williams/Lundgren, move to approve the minutes as amended, Vote: 5-0,
motion carried.
Public Hearing: Easton Village – Preliminary Plat
Klatt started his presentation of the Preliminary Plat. He noted that the plat includes 217
single family lots and includes a significant portion of the planned Village Parkway minor
collector road. He noted that there is also an access proposed to Manning Ave., which
staff is recommending be temporary until the collector road connects to 30th Street.
Klatt noted that the Minor/Lampert residential home and Northern Natural Gas service
station is access by a private driveway that crosses the Union Pacific rail corridor.
Klatt noted that the Planning Commission reviewed the Sketch Plan in January in 2014.
The plat has been significantly revised in response to the initial review. The changes
included a more grid pattern for the streets, less cul-de-sacs and improved pedestrian
facilities. Klatt then discussed the review comments that arose from the Park
Commissions review of the Sketch Plan.
Regarding the planned buffers that are guided in the Comprehensive Plan, Klatt noted
that the applicants are proposing to use significant portions of the greenbelt for
stormwater management. Klatt noted how sewer was expected to be extended as part
of the Easton Village Sanitary Sewer project. It should be noted that there is currently a
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-30-14
2
collaborative effort by multiple private parties to extend sanitary sewer up the eastern
side of the Village to the northern portions of the Village.
Klatt mentioned how the AUAR relates to the review of the Preliminary Plat.
Regarding density, Klatt noted that the net density is 2.5 units per acre. Most of the lots
are 65’ or 75’ in width. All of the lots meet the City’s minimum size requirements for the
Urban Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning.
The most critical aspect of review for the proposed plat is storm water management.
Due to the significant drainage issues related to this location, it will be imperative to
provide an effective storm water management system. The applicant still needs to get
approval from the Valley Branch Watershed District.
Klatt moved on to discuss Village Parkway. He noted that the design of Village Parkway
is different than 5th St., as it does not have a center planted median. Klatt shared the
reasons why a different design is being considered by the City.
Klatt moved on to highlight important issues surrounding the Lake Elmo Airport. He
noted that the Metropolitan Airport Commission has submitted a comment letter to the
City. The most important consideration related to the airport relates to the design of
the storm water facilities. They will need to be designed in a way that does not attract
waterfowl.
To wrap up the key issues of review, Klatt discussed the proposed connection to
Manning Ave. He noted that staff is recommending that the access to Manning Ave. be
temporary. The reason for this recommendation is that if the connection is permanent,
then more traffic will be directed to a portion of the neighborhood that is intended to
serve local residential traffic.
Klatt noted that staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat with 21
conditions of approval. Klatt discussed the proposed findings as shown in the Staff
Report. After showing the staff recommendation and proposed findings and conditions,
Klatt presented the plat and other preliminary plans to the Planning Commission.
Dodson asked if the staff and the applicants explored aligning Village Parkway along the
natural gasline easement. Klatt noted that they did explore the possibility, but the land
uses to the south of this area made it difficult to bring the collector road through.
Dodson asked about the proposed parkland dedication and Condition #11. Klatt
explained why it is difficult at this time to make more firm plans for the site north of the
railroad tracks. Dodson asked about Outlot G and the pedestrian crossing of Village
Parkway.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-30-14
3
Williams asked about Condition #4. Williams asked if there was any trail connections
proposed to a potential future trail on Manning Ave., as the County has shown the
possibility of trails along this corridor.
Tom Wolter, Easton Village, LLC, introduced himself and welcomed any questions.
Williams asked about the mass grading of the site, and asked if all the area will be
properly settled after the grading. Wolter noted that all the building pads will be
certified by a soils engineer. Williams asked the applicant if making the access to
Manning temporary is acceptable. Wolter noted that they would like to discuss the
timing of the closure with City and County staff, but they are open to making it
temporary.
Dodson asked about the High Water level of one of the ponds. He asked about the trail
location along blocks 4 and 5 near outlot B. The applicants noted that they are planning
a sledding hill in Outlot B.
Williams asked about the infiltration basin in Outlot B. Todd Erickson, project engineer,
explained the design of storm water ponds in Outlot B. Dorschner asked about the
safety components of the pond. Erickson stated that there is a safety bench planned,
which is typical for a pond of this depth.
Public Hearing opened at 8:17pm.
Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33rd St. N., shared some of the guiding principles of the
Village Master Plan and noted that she is in opposition to the proposed plat. She shared
some thoughts about safety related to the railroad tracks, the airport, and the Manning
Ave. corridor. She stated that she does not support the proposed development as
proposed.
The City did receive written comments from the Metropolitan Airport Commission.
These comments were entered into the record.
Public Hearing closed at 8:22 pm.
Williams asked if the applicant is seeking parkland dedication for Outlot K. The
applicants noted that they are seeking credit for Outlot K. Williams asked how staff is
calculating dedication for trail areas. Klatt stated that the City requires 30 feet of width
for a trail to accommodate for maintenance.
There was a general discussion about railroad noise. Klatt explained the guidance of the
AUAR regarding railroad noise.
There was a discussion about the level of parkland dedication and the labeling of the
outlots. Staff noted that the outlots and calculations have been consistent.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-30-14
4
Lundgren is concerned about the number of conditions of approval. Erickson noted that
the number of conditions is fairly typical in his experience. He also noted the importance
of the window of opportunity of the construction season. Klatt spoke to the City’s
recommendation and explained the reason for conditions and approval.
Williams spoke about the design of Village Parkway. Klatt explained that the volume of
cars drives how the roadway is designed. In this case, staff is recommending no center
median because the cost does not justify it based on many factors.
Williams spoke about the draft findings. He noted that finding #3 is not accurate.
Williams stated that he is in favor of recommending approval of the plat with
conditions, but not based on finding number 3. Condition # 9 shall include “for the
storm water management system”. Combine findings 4 and 6 and include the language
“with the conditions noted in the Engineer’s report dated 6/26/14”.
There was a discussion about the design of Village Parkway. Initially the Commission was
inclined to add a landscaped center median as a condition of approval. After hearing
from staff regarding the design, costs and the right-of-way width needed, the Planning
Commission decided not to include the planted median.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Dodson, move to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat of
Easton Village with the amendments to condition 9 and combining findings 3 and 5.
Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
Public Hearing: Village Preserve – Preliminary Plat
Johnson presented an overview of a preliminary plat to be called Village Preserve,
located in the northern portion of the Village Planning Area. He discussed the future
land use plan for this area and reviewed the overall lot layout and street configuration.
Johnson reviewed a summary of the specific comments from staff, and presented the
critical issues that were identified, which included stormwater management, park land
dedication, and sanitary sewer. He stated that staff is recommending approval of the
preliminary plat with 12 conditions of approval.
Dodson questioned how much of the storm water was currently being directed
downstream and how this would change with the proposed development. Johnson
noted that the developer cannot increase the volume of water leaving the site post
development under City and watershed district reviews. Johnson also stated that the
City will be working with developers and the watershed district to identify options for
diverting water to other watershed basins.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-30-14
5
The Commission asked general questions about the future road connections, the density
of the subdivision, the proposed trail connections and the ownership of the storm water
ponds.
Dave Gonyea commented that there is only a very small portion of the existing overall
storm water being directed north to another waterhshed basin. He noted that the Park
Commission asked that the trails around Outlot D allow for the maximum potential use
of the land until a final plan for the park can be implemented.
Public Hearing opened at 10:07pm.
No one spoke
Public Hearing closed at 10:08 pm.
Williams asked that condition number 5 be revised to specify that the condition apply to
the storm water management plan. He also asked that condition 13 be added to require
that all storm water outlots be dedicated to the City. Williams requested that findings 4
and 5 note that the plat meets the City’s requirements with the exceptions noted in the
staff report and the comments made.
M/S/P: Lundgren/Larson, move to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat of
Village Preserve with the 12 conditions drafted by staff with the findings of fact listed in
the staff report with modifications to finding 4 and adding condition 13. Vote: 5-0,
motion carried unanimously.
Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan – Holliday Property
Johnson stated that the City has received an application for a Comprehensive Plan
amendment to change the future land use designation of property located at the
intersection of CSAH 15 and 30th Street from RAD-Rural Area Development to V-LDR-
Village Urban Low Density Residential. He reviewed an aerial image showing the current
site conditions and reviewed other details concerning the existing and proposed land
use for the property. Johnson described the land use designations that the
Comprehensive Plan guide the subject site and the property to the north.
Johnson summarized the Staff review comments, focusing on the Staff findings that
support approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. He noted that the
amendment would facilitate the construction of the Village Parkway across a property
that would otherwise have very limited development potential. The staff
recommendation includes a condition that the parcel to the west of the subject
property be screened with year-round plantings.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-30-14
6
Dave Gonyea stated that the amendment is critical for moving their proposed sketch
plan forward on this property and the adjacent property to the north.
Public Hearing opened at 10:32 pm.
Public Hearing closed at 10:32 pm.
M/S/P: Dodson/Dorschner, move to recommend approval of the request to amend the
City’s future land use map and to change the future land use dedication from RAD to V-
LDR with the conditions recommended by staff. Vote: 5-0, motion carried.
Business Item: Village Preserve South – Sketch Plan Review
Johnson presented an overview of a proposed sketch plan for a residential subdivision
to be called Village Preserve South. The site is located within the southern portion of
the Village Planning area and is within an area guided for future sewer service. Johnson
discussed the existing site conditions and reviewed the proposed subdivision layout with
the Commission and other details concerning the proposed subdivision. He reviewed
the key issues with the sketch plan that have been identified by Staff and summarize the
review comments identified in the staff report to the Commission.
Dorschner commented that the proposed bump out/cul-de-sac with direct access to the
parkway may be problematic. Johnson noted that this connection will be subject to
further review and comment by the City Engineer and will need to work within the
overall geometrics of the Village Parkway. Williams noted that the first intersection
north of 30th Street may be too close to 30th Street. Johnson replied that the City
Engineer has found the proposed spacing to be acceptable given the design parameters
of the parkway.
Williams questioned why the parkway was intersecting 30th Street at a one-way no
entrance road to the South. Johnson stated that there are advantages to lining up
intersections even if one of the roads is a very low volume roadway, and would be
considered a safer alternative to off-setting intersections. Dodson asked if the City
could take a look at whether or not there would be advantages to having the parkway
follow a more rigid North/South alignment. Johnson replied that the City could look
into this.
Williams questioned whether or not the City’s ordinances would allow the crediting of
park land dedication for a remote site. Johnson stated that staff would look into this
with the City Attorney. Williams expressed concerns about the reduction in the green
belt buffer along 30th Street, the need for watershed district review of the storm water
system, the location of the intersection of the parkway with 30th Street, and the
screening the McLeod property to the west.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-30-14
7
Dodson stated that he liked that most of the lots do not abut another residential lot in
the rear yard, but would like to see modifications to the bump-out lots.
Larson questioned whether or not the proposed trails could eventually connect to a trail
or sidewalk system on 30th Street. Johnson noted that the City has looked into the
possibility of placing trails along 30th Street, but cited limited right-of-way as a potential
barrier to this occurring.
Updates and Concerns
Council Updates – None
Staff Updates
1. Upcoming Meetings
a. July 14, 2014
b. July 28, 2014
Commission Concerns –
Dodson questioned how binding the proposed findings would be in cases where
conditions of approval. Staff noted that the findings should line up with the conditions
of approval and the staff needs to be clear about them. Klatt noted that the findings
need to support the decision made and the information distributed.
Dorschner suggested an ordinance to deal with railroad setbacks and safety issues and
possibly require some berms based on feedback from professionals.
Dorschner asked about site visits, done like a workshop. Lundgren supported. There
was a general discussion concerning the best manner for Planning Commissioners to
visit development sites. Johnson stated that staff has name badges and that might be
an option.
Meeting adjourned at 11:16 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Joan Ziertman
Planning Program Assistant
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-30-14
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 7/14/2014
AGENDA ITEM: 4A – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2014-37
ITEM: Kwik Trip Gasoline Station – Preliminary Plat, Final Plat and Conditional Use
Permit
SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
Ann Pung-Terwedo, Washington County
Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
Stephen Mastey, Landscape Architecture, Inc.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a request from CM Properties 94 LP and Kwik
Trip, Inc. to plat a portion of a property located immediately west of Keats Avenue (CSAH 19) and
immediately south of Hudson Boulevard North within Stage 1 of the I-94 Corridor Planning Area
with the intent of constructing a Kwik Trip gasoline station. In addition to the platting application,
the request includes application for a Conditional Use Permit, as gasoline stations and car washes
require a conditional use permit in the Commercial zoning district. Staff is recommending approval
of the request subject to compliance with 8 conditions as noted in this report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: CM Properties 94 Limited Partnership (Bruce Miller); 3470 Washington Drive,
Suite 102, Eagan, MN 55112 and Kwik Trip, Inc. (Scott Teigen); PO Box 2107,
La Crosse, WI 54603.
Property Owners: CM Properties 94 LP (Bruce Miller); 3470 Washington Drive, Suite 102, Eagan,
MN 55112
Location: Part of Sections 34, Township 29 North, Range 21 West in Lake Elmo,
immediately west of Keats Avenue North (CSAH 19), immediately south of
Hudson Boulevard North and immediately north of Interstate Highway 94. PID
Number: 34.029.21.44.0007.
Request: Application for preliminary plat, final plat and conditional use permit approval of
a gasoline station in Stage 1 of the I-94 Corridor Planning Area.
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant agricultural land. Current Zoning: RT – Rural
Development Transitional Zoning District; Proposed Zoning: C
– Commercial District
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North – vacant/agricultural land, guided for C - Commercial;
west – vacant/agricultural land, guided for C- Commercial;
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4B – ACTION ITEM
2
south – Interstate Highway 94; east – Keats Avenue North
(CSAH 19)
Comprehensive Plan: Commercial
History: Utilities (sewer and water) were extended to the subject property as part of the
Section 34 Public Utility Project, which is now complete.
Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 5/28/2014
60 Day Deadline – 7/28/14
Extension Letter Mailed – No
120 Day Deadline – 9/26/14
Applicable Regulations: Chapter 153 – Subdivision Regulations
§154.106 Conditional Use Permits
Article 12 – Commercial Districts (C)
Article 7 – Specific Development Standards (§154.305)
§150.270 Storm Water, Erosion, and Sediment Control
§150.035 Lighting, Glare Control and Exterior Lighting Standards
REQUEST DETAILS
The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from CM Properties 94 Limited Partnership and Kwik
Trip, Inc. for a preliminary and final plat to subdivide 5.87 acres of land located within Stage 1 of the
I-94 Corridor Planning Area into 2 lots with the intention of constructing a Kwik Trip gasoline
station. The proposed plat would be located on property currently owned by CM Properties 94
Limited Partnership, and would be located immediately west of Keats Avenue (CSAH 19),
immediately south of Hudson Boulevard, and immediately north of Interstate Highway 94. The
parcel has historically been used for agricultural purposes.
The proposed plat and conditional use permit application have been developed in response to the
City’s Comprehensive Plan, which identifies the applicant’s property for Commercial development.
The proposed Kwik Trip would be the first commercial development in the eastern portion of Stage 1
of the I-94 Corridor Planning Area since the adoption of the City’s current Land Use Plan.
In terms of access, the proposed site plan shows two connections to Hudson Blvd. along the northern
boundary of the site. To account for the appropriate access spacing necessary for Hudson Blvd., the
applicants are showing the western access to be a full access, supporting all turning movements,
while the eastern access shall serve only as a right-out exit to Hudson. The City Engineer has
reviewed the proposed access locations and found them to be acceptable with the proposed access
spacing.
PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES
The proposed Kwik Trip site is guided for Commercial development in the City’s Comprehensive
Plan. The overall subdivision plan has therefore been prepared in order to comply with the district
standards for the Commercial zoning district in terms of lot size, lot widths, building setbacks, and
other design criteria. It should be noted that while a neighborhood convenience store is a permitted
use in the Commercial zoning district, gasoline stations are considered a conditional use. In addition,
car washes, while accessory to the gasoline station use, also are a conditional use. For these reasons,
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
3
the applicant must apply for a conditional use permit for approval of the gasoline station and car
wash land uses.
The proposed plat would subdivide the subject property into two parcels; one parcel (Lot 1, Block 1)
for the proposed Kwik Trip and an outlot (Outlot A) for a future commercial development adjacent to
the proposed Kwik Trip. The proposed size of the site (Lot 1) for the Kwik Trip is 89,355 square
feet, or 2.05 acres. The remaining area for Outlot A would be 3.82 acres, which will likely be used
for future commercial development and additional storm water management. It should be noted that
the applicant is requesting to proceed with Preliminary Plat and Final Plat concurrently. From staff’s
perspective, if the applicant is meeting all the submission requirements for both preliminary and final
plat, and the proposed plat is limited in scope and scale, then proceeding through both steps
concurrently is acceptable. To better define what constitutes a project of limited scope or scale in
staff’s judgment, a limited scale plat would involve subdivision of a limited number of parcels
without the need for major infrastructure improvements (utility extensions, new public roads, etc.). In
this context, the proposed plat is of limited scale and scope according to staff.
In reviewing the applicable requirements from the City’s zoning and subdivision regulations, staff
has found that the proposed project is in conformance with these requirements. More specifically,
staff reviewed the proposed gasoline station in light of the following:
• Lot Size. The proposed lot being platted for the commercial use is 89,355 square feet, which
meets the minimum lot size requirement of 20,000 square feet per the Commercial zoning
district.
• Building Setback Requirements. The proposed gasoline station/convenience store meets the
required building setbacks (front: 30 feet, corner side yard: 25 feet, interior side yard: 10 feet
and rear yard: 10 feet) for the Commercial district. In addition, the car wash meets the 10-
foot setback requirement for accessory buildings.
• Parking Setbacks. The proposed parking stalls all meet the required parking setback
requirements per the Commercial zoning district.
• Impervious Surface. The maximum amount of impervious surface in the Commercial
zoning district is 75%. The propose project complies with this requirement, as there is
62,010 square feet of pervious surface proposed, which is 69% of lot area.
• Parking Stalls. Per the City’s off-street parking requirements, gasoline stations are required
to have one parking stall for every 250 square feet of gross floor area used for sales. Using
this calculation, staff determined that 23 parking stalls would be required. The applicants
are proposing 28 standard and 2 handicap parking stalls, easily meeting the City’s parking
requirement.
• Specific Development Standards – Gasoline Stations and Car Washes. The City adopted
specific development standards (§154.305) for gasoline stations and car washed, both of
which are included in this proposal. In reviewing these standards, staff found that the
application was in compliance with the specific development standards related to these two
uses, including the following:
o Access to a Collector. The proposed gas station meets the minimum lot size
requirements and has access to a collector street (Hudson Blvd.).
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
4
o Canopies. The proposed canopy meets the required setback of 20 feet from all
property lines. In addition the canopy columns reflect the design and building
materials of the principal building.
o Outdoor Displays. Proposed outdoor merchandise is either located under the canopy
or adjacent to the principal structure, meeting all setback requirements.
o Car Wash Enclosure. The proposed car wash has doors that enclose the car wash
while in operation.
o Sounds from Speakers. The car wash area is not within close proximity to any
residential districts or properties. Any sounds from speakers related to the car wash
should not negatively impact any residential properties.
Based on Staff’s review of the Site Plan and Supporting Plans for the proposed gasoline station and
car wash, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with all applicable Zoning Code requirements
related to gasoline stations in Commercial districts.
In terms of parkland dedication, the Subdivision Ordinance requires any property being developed in
Commercial districts to pay a fee as determined by Resolution by the City Council. Currently, the fee
for parkland dedication for commercial properties is $4,500 per acre of land subdivided for
commercial use. In this case, the applicant is proposing to subdivide 2.05 acres of land for
commercial use. The remaining land is being left in outlot. Using the $4,500 fee per acre, the
applicant will be required to provide $9,225 (2.05 acres x $4,500 per acre = $9,225) to the City to
comply with the City’s parkland dedication requirement. Staff would recommend that this fee be
provided to the City in advance of releasing the final plat for recording (Condition #4).
Finally, as the gasoline station and car wash is considered a conditional use in the Commercial
zoning district, the applicant has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP). Per the procedure
described in Article 3 of the Zoning Code (§154.106), the City is required to make findings related to
the proposed conditional use. Generally speaking, these finding are required to ensure that no
negative impacts to the adjacent properties or broader community are associated with the proposed
use. Staff reviewed all 12 required findings per the procedure for CUPs and found that the proposed
use meets all the criteria to be granted a conditional use permit. As part of the draft findings for
recommending approval of the request, staff has included the required findings that relate to the
conditional use permit.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
City Staff has reviewed the proposed plat and conditional use permit, which has gone through
multiple versions in advance of the formal application being accepted as complete by the City. As
currently submitted, the proposed plat will meet all applicable City requirements for conditional
approval, and any deficiencies or additional work that is needed is identified in the recommended
conditions of approval.
Also, the City has received a detailed list of comments from the City Engineer and Washington
County concerning the proposed gasoline station, in addition to informal review by the City’s Fire
Chief and Building Official. The written review comments from the City Engineer and Washington
County are attached for consideration by the Planning Commission.
In addition to the general comments that have been provided in the preceding sections of this report,
Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the following discussion areas as well:
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
5
• Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision and commercial use is consistent with the
Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan for this area. The parcel is within Stage 1 of the I-94
Corridor Planning Area and has access to City sanitary sewer and water.
• Zoning. The proposed zoning for the Lakewood Crossing site will be C – Commercial. The
submitted development plans demonstrate compliance with the City’s Commercial zoning
district standards. Neighborhood Convenience Store is a permitted use in the Commercial
zoning district, while gasoline station and car wash are conditional uses. The applicants have
applied for a conditional use permit in conjunction with the platting request.
• Subdivision Requirements. The City’s Subdivision Ordinance includes a fairly lengthy list
of standards that must be met by all new subdivisions, and include requirements for blocks,
lots, easements, erosion and sediment control, drainage systems, monuments, sanitary sewer
and water facilities, streets, and other aspects of the plans. Staff, as well as the City
Engineer, have not identified any existing conflicts with the City’s Subdivision Ordinance.
• Access. Staff has the following review comments related to access:
o Eastern Right-Out Only Access. To provide access to the proposed gasoline station,
the applicant is proposing two access locations (west and east) along Hudson
Boulevard. The City Engineer reviewed the proposed access locations and found the
spacing to be acceptable. However, staff is recommending that the eastern access be
permitted only as a right-out only. The applicants have updated their plans to reflect
this design. After reviewing the proposed right-out eastern access, staff and
Washington County found that the proposed right turn is too sharp, necessitating a
different design or an acceleration lane on Hudson. Staff is comfortable working
with the applicant to arrive and the best suited design for the right-out eastern access
(Condition #1b).
o Left Turn Lane on Hudson Blvd. In addition to the right-out access (eastern access),
City staff also requested a left turn lane to serve the full western access of the gas
station. It is important to note that Hudson Boulevard is classified as a collector road
and it anticipated to serve a substantial amount of traffic as the I-94 Corridor
develops. The City does not plan to expand Hudson to a 4-lane roadway. In addition,
the western full access will also be designed to serve Outlot A in addition to the
gasoline station. For these reasons, staff recommended a left turn lane on westbound
Hudson Blvd for the full shared access between the proposed gasoline station and
Outlot A. The applicants have provided the left turn lane to respond to the staff
request. However, in reviewing the proposed design, the City Engineer found that
the taper is too abrupt for a 50mph design speed. Staff is recommending that the
taper be enlarged to allow for a more appropriate design for the existing conditions of
Hudson Boulevard (Condition #1a).
o Western Shared Access. Finally, staff is also recommending that the western shared
full access be expanded to 40 feet in width (Condition #1c), which would allow for
both right and left turn lanes to exi t the site. The current width as proposed is
approximately 36 feet. The requested expansion would include approximately 4 feet
of additional width to allow better circulation in and out of the proposed gasoline
station, as well as whatever future use is located on Outlot A. In addition to the
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
6
requested modification to the design of the western access drive, staff is also
recommending that the applicant provide an access easement along the portion of
shared access driveway that is located on the Kwik Trip site (Condition #2). The goal
is to ensure that the future use on Outlot A has dedicated full access to the western
driveway.
• Landscaping. The applicant has submitted a Landscape Plan (Sheet L1) as part of the
proposed gasoline station. The City’s landscaping provisions (§154.258) require1 tree per 50
feet of street frontage. In addition to street plantings, the City’s requirements include 5 trees
per developed acre. Given these requirements, staff calculated that 15 street trees are
required (based on approximately 780 feet of street frontage on Hudson and Keats) and 10
interior trees are required (5 trees per acre). The total required amount of trees per staff’s
calculation is 25 trees. The applicants are proposing 25 trees of both deciduous and
coniferous varieties, meeting the City’s requirement. It should be noted that the coniferous
trees are being utilized to screen the trash or refuse area. In addition to the trees, the
applicants are proposing a variety of shrubs and planted beds. Finally, staff has distributed
the Landscape Plan to the City’s Landscape Consultant, Stephen Mastey. Staff would
recommend as a condition of approval (Condition #5) that the Landscape Plan be reviewed
by the Landscape Consultant. In addition to review, staff would recommend that any
modifications related to plant species or location be incorporated in the Final Landscape Plan
prior to issuance of the building permit.
• Theming and Branding. As part of the improvements proposed for the gasoline station, the
applicants are proposing to install decorative fencing that is consistent with the design
recommended by the City’s Theming and Branding Study. The decorative fencing is a white
three-rail fence that is often used on agricultural properties for horses. The applicants are
proposing to install this fencing along the northeastern portions of the property, which should
be visible from Keats Ave. N. (CSAH 19).
• Architectural Design Review. City staff reviewed the architectural plans and architectural
renderings of the proposed Kwik Trip gasoline station and car wash for consistency with the
Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual (Attachment #11). Overall, Staff finds
that the proposed building meets the guidelines and standards for Commercial development
contained within the manual and would offer the following review comments:
o Building Materials. The proposed building is chiefly constructed of red modular
brick. Accent materials include limestone and tan brick soldier course. The proposed
building materials meet the City standards for building materials in the Commercial
district.
o Streetscape. A significant portion of the proposed landscaping are located along the
public right-of-way for Hudson Boulevard and Keats Avenue (CSAH 19). In
addition, the applicants are proposing to install a three-rail decorative fence that is
consistent with the City’s Branding and Theming Study. In staff’s judgment, the
proposed design will be contributing to a positive streetscape.
o Storage Areas. The Manual requires that trash collection area be located out of the
view of the public right-of-way. The proposed site plan indicated that the trash
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
7
collection area will be enclosed and located in the far eastern portion of the site. The
proposed trash collection area meets the intent of the standard.
o Entry. The proposed convenience store has accent treatments of both limestone and
tan brick soldier course around the entryway. In addition, the peaked roof at the entry
provides an additional architectural feature.
• Photometric Plan. To demonstrate compliance with the City’s sign and exterior lighting
ordinances, the applicant has submitted a Photometric Plan. The Photometric Plan includes
information about the lighting fixtures proposed for the site. In addition, it provides
information about the light intensity, measuring the foot candles across the entire site and
beyond. Based on the plan, the applicants are proposing pole lights that are 18 feet in height
and that include a 90 degree cutoff. In addition, the proposed lighting internal to the canopy
are recessed LEDs. From staff’s review of the photometric plan, the proposed lighting is
consistent with the City’s ordinance, as the plan does an effective job of limiting light from
being directed outside of the property. Generally speaking, the foot-candle reading at or near
the property boundaries are all very low and are consistent with the ordinance. In addition,
the 18-foot pole lights do not exceed the maximum height allowed for such lighting (30 feet
maximum height for lights in non-residential districts with cutoff 90 degrees or less). When
City staff reviews the building permit for the proposed gasoline station, a more in-depth
review of the proposed lighting will be completed to ensure conformance to the City’s
ordinance.
• Signage Plan. As part of the plat and conditional use permit applications, the applicants have
submitted a signage plan. The signage plan includes multiple sign types, including wall signs,
canopy signs and a monument or ground sign. From a high level review perspective, it
appear that the proposed signage will meet the City’s Sign Ordinance. However, the
applicant will be required to submit sign permits for the proposed signage, at which time staff
will conduct a more in-depth review. Staff is recommending that the applicant submit sign
permits for any proposed signage (Condition #6)
• City Engineer Review. The City Engineer has provided the Planning Department with a
detailed comment letter (Attachment #8) as a summary of his review of the proposed gasoline
station. The majority of the Engineer’s comments relate to traffic and access management. In
addition, the Engineer identifies other aspects of the proposed plan that currently do not meet
City Engineering Standard, including utilities, grading and erosion control. As a condition of
approval, staff is recommending that all modification requested by the City Engineer in his
memo dated 7/9/14 be incorporated into Final Plans prior to the approval of the building
permit (Condition #1).
• Fire Department Review. The Fire Chief has reviewed the Utility Plan for the proposed
gasoline station and found the proposed hydrant location to be acceptable. Additional review
by the Fire Chief will be required upon the submission of the building permit.
• Washington County Review. County Staff has reviewed the Lakewood Crossing plat and
proposed gasoline station, providing comments in a written memorandum dated 7/9/14
(Attachment #9). In the memo, they note that no additional right-of-way for Keats Ave. N. is
required as part of the proposed plat. In addition, the County recommends that the City
monitor the traffic situation along the Hudson Boulevard corridor with the possibility that the
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
8
eastern right-out only access be removed at some point in the future. To account for this
consideration, the City Engineer has recommended that a center median be installed adjacent
to the right-out only access at some point in the future as opposed to eliminating the access.
Finally, the memo from Washington County also includes notification that the Hudson Blvd.
corridor in Lake Elmo is currently being considered as one the alternate alignments (D2
Alignment) for the Gateway Corridor transit project to be constructed at some point in the
future. City staff have also notified the applicants of this possibility in previous meetings.
• MnDOT Review. The Minnesota Department of Transportation owns a substantial amount of
right-of-way surrounding the proposed gasoline station site. In a review email dated 7/10/14,
MnDOT noted that the applicant may not include any ponding within the MnDOT right-of-
way. In addition, any work affecting or impacting the MnDOT right-of-way will require a
permit. Staff is recommending that the applicant obtain necessary permits from MnDOT for
any work impacting the MnDOT right-of-way (Condition #8)
• Watershed Districts. The project area lies within the Valley Branch Watershed District
(VBWD). It should be noted that the developer must meet all the rules of the Wetland
Conservation Act and VBWD and will need to secure permits from the VBWD in order to
proceed with the development as planned (Condition #3).
Based on the above Staff report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat,
final plat and conditional use permit with 8 conditions of approval. The recommended conditions are
as follows:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1) All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in a review letter
dated July 9, 2014 shall be incorporated into the plans prior to the approval of the building
permit for the gasoline station. Required modifications include, but are not limited to, the
following:
a. The design of the west-bound left turn lane proposed for the southwest access on
Hudson Boulevard must be revised to incorporate a 50:1 taper to account for the
50mph design speed of the road as suggested by the City Engineer and the supporting
consultant.
b. The design of the northeast right-out only access must be revised per the
recommendation of the City Engineer and Washington County. The design of the
northeast access must be approved by the City prior to the approval of the building
permit.
c. The width of the western full access road must be modified to 40 feet to allow for one
inbound lane (16 feet wide) and two outbound lanes (left and right turn lanes, 12 feet
wide).
2) The applicant shall provide for an access easement over the entire portion of the shared
western driveway located on Lot 1, Block 1 to provide dedicated access for Outlot A.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
9
3) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland
Conservation Act, and shall acquire the needed permits from Valley Branch Watershed
District prior to the commencement of any grading or development activity on the site.
4) The applicant shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the City concerning the storm
water infiltration areas prior to the issuance of a building permit for the gasoline station.
5) The applicant shall pay a parkland dedication fee in the amount of $9,225.00 prior to the final
plat being released for recording.
6) The Landscape Plan shall be reviewed by the City’s Landscape Consultant. Any
modifications requested by the Landscape Consultant shall be incorporated into the Final
Landscape Plan prior to the approval of the building permit for the gasoline station.
7) The applicant shall secure a sign permit for all signage associated with the proposed gasoline
station.
8) The applicant shall secure any necessary MnDOT permits for any work impacting the
MnDOT right-of-way.
DRAFT FINDINGS
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to
the proposed Lakewood Crossing preliminary plat, final plat and conditional use permit:
• That the Lakewood Crossing preliminary and final plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area.
• That the Lakewood Crossing preliminary and final plat complies with the City’s C –
Commercial zoning district.
• That the Lakewood Crossing preliminary and final plat complies with the City’s subdivision
ordinance.
• That the Lakewood Crossing preliminary and final plat meets other City zoning ordinances,
such as landscaping, erosion and sediment control, and other ordinances.
• That the Lakewood Crossing preliminary and final plat is consistent with the City’s
engineering standards provided the plans are updated to address the City Engineer’s
comments documented in a letter July 9, 2014.
• That the proposed architectural design of the gasoline station, canopy and car wash is
consistent with the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual.
• That the proposed use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or City.
• That the use or development conforms to the City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan.
• That the use or development is compatible with the existing neighborhood.
• That the proposed use meets all specific development standards for such use listed in Article
7 of the Zoning Code.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
10
• That the proposed use will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be
compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and
will not change the essential character of the area.
• That the proposed use will not be hazardous or create a nuisance as defined under the Zoning
Code to existing or future neighboring structures.
• That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services,
including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and
sewer systems.
• That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for
public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the
community.
• That the proposed use will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
• That vehicular approaches to the property will not create traffic congestion or interfere wit
traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares.
• That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic
feature of major importance.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Lakewood Crossing
Preliminary Plat and Final Plat. In addition, staff recommends that the Planning Commission
recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed Kwik Trip gasoline station and
car wash. Staff is recommending approval of the requests subject to 8 conditions of approval as
listed in the Staff report. Suggested motion:
“Move to recommend approval of the Lakewood Crossing Preliminary and Final Plat and
Conditional Use Permit with the 8 conditions of approval as drafted by Staff based on the findings
of fact listed in the Staff Report.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Application Forms and Narrative
3. Lakewood Crossing Preliminary and Final Plat
4. Kwik Trip Site Plan and Supporting Plans (12 sheets)
5. Kwik Trip Architectural Plans
6. Kwik Trip Architectural Renderings
7. Kwik Trip Signage Plan
8. City Engineer Review Memorandum, dated 7/9/14
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
11
9. Washington County Review Memorandum, dated 7/9/14
10. MnDOT Review Email, dated 7/10/14
11. Design Guidelines and Standards - Commercial
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ........................................................................................ Planning Staff
- Report by Staff ................................................................................... Planning Staff
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Open the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Close the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping,
Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Data Scource: Washington County, MN
7-10-2014
Site Plan: 34.029.21.44.0007
K05001,000250 Feet
1"=500'
34.029.21.44.0007
(Proposed Kwik Trip Site)
§¨¦94§¨¦94
Huds
o
n
B
l
v
d
.
K
e
a
t
s
A
v
e
.
N
.
Savona
Hu
d
s
o
n
B
l
v
d
.
456719
PAGE 1 of 2
MEMORANDUM
Date: July 9, 2014
To: Nick Johnson, City Planner Re: Lakewood Crossing – Kwik Trip
Cc: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director Preliminary/Final Plat Review
From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer
An engineering review has been completed for the Lakewood Crossings – Kwik Trip. Site Plans were received on
June 30, 2014. The submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Carlson McCain:
Lakewood Crossing Preliminary Plat dated June 27, 2014.
Kwik Trip Store #248 Site Plans dated June 27, 2014.
Kwik Trip Store #248 Storm Water Management Plan dated June 27, 2014.
Engineering review comments are as follows:
Preliminary Plat / General Comments:
1. The drainage and utility easements must be placed on both the utility plan, Sheet SP4, and the grading plan,
Sheet SP3 to demonstrate sufficient easement is being provided. A minimum 15 feet of utility easement is
required from the centerline of the proposed watermain utility. It appears additional easement is required.
2. Governing Specifications must be in accordance with the City of Lake Elmo Standard Specifications for
General Requirements, including summary of work, project meeting requirements, submittals, regulatory
requirements, testing, traffic control, erosion and sedimentation and pollution control, and close‐out
requirements; and for utility technical specifications. A specification booklet must be created for the
project, approved by the City and provided to the contractor for use on the project.
3. Engineering has not reviewed the proposed lighting and landscape improvements.
Site Plans, Traffic and Access Management Requirements:
1. Hudson Boulevard is a local collector roadway and Municipal State Aid route. Hudson Boulevard is expected
to receive significant growth in traffic volume as the I94 corridor develops. The road is considered to be a
major collector for serving the area but it is the goal of the City to maintain the road as 2‐lanes. In order to
achieve that goal left and right turn lanes will need to be implemented throughout the corridor to facilitate
the turning movements for the developing areas while maintaining the mobility of the through traffic.
2. The Access Management Guidelines per the City’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan requires a minimum
spacing of 1/8 mile (660 feet) for commercial driveway access along Hudson Boulevard. The proposed
westerly access for this site plan appears to sufficiently meet this spacing at ~550 feet. The westerly driveway
can be permitted full access if the access is developed as a shared access driveway with Outlot A.
3. The property to the north will also be required to access Hudson Boulevard at this location.
4. The shared access driveway width should be at least 40 feet to accommodate one inbound lane (16 feet
wide) and two 12 feet wide outbound lanes (left and right turn lanes).
5. The easterly driveway should be permitted as a right‐out‐only exit. Future improvements to Hudson
Boulevard will likely include the placement of a center raised median to prohibit left turning movements
from this site.
FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261
Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264
Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267
Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4285
PAGE 2 of 2
6. The right‐out‐only exit should be revised to increase the site lines for traffic existing the facility. This can be
achieved by increasing the intersection angle. The construction of a dedicated acceleration lane could also
be considered to address safe egress from the site.
7. The site plan proposes a temporary left turn lane for the westerly driveway access as requested by staff. The
pavement markings shall be revised using larger tapers more appropriate for the posted speed limit (see
attached TKDA review memorandum and sketch dated June 26, 2014).
8. The plans must be revised to provide greater plan and specification detail for the improvements to Hudson
Boulevard. Detailed dimensions shall be placed on the plan sheets indicating start and stop stationing, lane
widths, shoulder widths, etc.
9. Shoulder widening details must be dimensioned indicating start and stop stationing, road width increases,
pavement section details, and material details. Pavement widening must be completed using minimum
practical widths and avoiding tapering at the end points.
10. Specifications and plan notes must be added to further detail the improvements to Hudson Boulevard.
11. All pavement markings shall be shown as epoxy resin with drop‐on glass beads per the City’s standard
specifications.
Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan:
1. City Standard Plan Notes for Grading and Erosion Control, Details 600A‐D, must be placed on the Grading
and Erosion Control Plan, Sheet SP3. All other conflicting information must be removed. Supplemental notes
may be provided if not already addressed by the City standards.
2. Governing Specifications for grading and erosion control must be in accordance with the City of Lake Elmo
standard specifications.
3. Retaining walls that exceed 4 feet in height must have a design submitted and certified by an engineer
licensed in the state of Minnesota.
Utility Plans:
1. City Standard Plan Notes for Watermain, Detail 200A, for Sanitary Sewer, Detail 300A, and for Storm Sewer,
Detail 400A, must be placed on the Utility Plan, Sheet SP4. All other conflicting information must be removed.
Supplemental notes may be provided if not already addressed by the City standards.
2. Governing Specifications for utilities must be in accordance with the City of Lake Elmo standard
specifications.
3. Add City Standard Detail Plate 210 – Watermain offset to plan sheet SP7. All watermain must be installed at
a depth of 7.5 feet or deeper. Shallow watermain with insulation will not be allowed. Watermain offsets will
be required when conflicts occur. This appears to be needed at the sanitary sewer crossing point.
4. The water and sewer laterals extending into Outlot A should be realigned to remain parallel to Hudson
Boulevard to allow more flexibility to the future extension for this property.
5. The proposed storm sewer system is being constructed entirely on privately owned property and does not
conform to the City engineering design standards for storm sewer systems. The storm sewer system should
therefore remain privately owned and maintained by the applicant, including the three driveway culverts.
6. Additional pipe cover appears to be needed over the proposed driveway culverts.
Stormwater Management:
1. The Storm Water Management Plan must meet VBWD rules and requirements. The applicant must provide
the City written approval from the VBWD.
2. The proposed storm water facilities will receive storm water from a privately owned and maintained storm
sewer system that will not be constructed to City engineering design standards. It is therefore recommended
that the storm water facilities be privately owned and maintained. A maintenance agreement in a form
acceptable to the City should be executed and recorded with the County for all permanent storm water
facilities to be located on private property. The agreement shall provide a maintenance plan defining the
maintenance responsibilities for the private owner, the type of maintenance and the maintenance intervals.
Memorandum
To: Ryan Stempski Reference:Lakewood Crossing
Copies To: Traffic Review
City of Lake Elmo
From: Bryant Ficek Project No.:15545.000
Date: June 26, 2014 Routing:
Per your request, we have reviewed the Turn Lane Exhibit for the Lakewood Crossing, dated
June 11, 2014, and sent for our review on June 18, 2014. The exhibit shows two points of
access for the site, both off Hudson Boulevard. A westbound left-turn lane from Hudson
Boulevard into the site is established through restriping and limited pavement widening. The
exhibit is attached to this memorandum for reference.
Our review focused on the ingress and egress of the site, particularly the proposed design of the
turn lane on Hudson Boulevard. Based on this review, our comments are:
• Keats Avenue is a County State Aid Highway and an A Minor Arterial. The City’s 2030
Comprehensive Plan lists an existing average daily traffic of 6,100 vehicles per day on
this roadway. Hudson Boulevard is a local frontage road, proposed to be a Major
Collector in the future. It has an average daily traffic volume of 1,300 as listed in the
City’s Comprehensive Plan. The exhibit shows that the site, appropriately, will be
accessed from Hudson Boulevard, which is both lower on the hierarchy of roads and
carries less traffic than Keats Avenue.
• The west access should be planned for full access into and out of the site. It is proposed
to be located farthest from the Hudson Boulevard/Keats Avenue intersection (~550 feet),
which will limit the interaction and influence of operations between these two
intersections. The width of this driveway should be at least 40 feet to accommodate one
inbound lane (16 feet wide) and two outbound lanes (left-turn lane 12 feet wide and
right-turn lane 12 feet wide).
• The proposed east access should be planned as a right-out-only exit. Unlike other
potential movements to and from this access, right turns from the site will have limited
impact to traffic operations on Hudson Boulevard and its intersection with Keats Avenue.
Providing a right-out-only exit will also improve site circulation, particularly for truck
movements. Proper signing and striping should be used to adequately notify drivers of
the restrictions on the access, such as Do Not Enter signs facing traffic on Hudson
Boulevard.
Memo Page 2 June 26, 2014
Lakewood Crossing Traffic Review
City of Lake Elmo
• To provide the necessary width for the proposed left-turn lane, the through lanes in each
direction on Hudson Boulevard are proposed to be shifted outward using 1:20 tapers.
Given that Hudson Boulevard has a posted speed limit of 50 mph, this taper is too
abrupt to shift through traffic. A taper rate of 1:50 is more appropriate and satisfies
MnDOT State Aid Standards. This will increase the taper distance from 120 feet to
325 feet. There appears to be sufficient space available on each side of the proposed
west access to accommodate this larger taper rate. A painted median on Hudson
Boulevard would also help to reinforce the right-turn-only exit from the east access.
• Ideally, the combined turn lane length and taper length from a through lane provides for
deceleration from the through lane’s travel speed and sufficient space for the expected
vehicle stacking. If this guideline were followed in this case, the posted speed limit of
50 mph would translate into a distance of 440 feet and a minimum of two cars for stacking
would translate into a minimum of 60 feet. The minimum turn lane and taper length would
then be 500 feet. However, other circumstances are frequently taken into account, such as
accounting for deceleration in the through lane before the turn lane and consideration of
the land use or expected traffic operations associated with the turn lane. Based on the
characteristics of this site and anticipated traffic operations, a minimum total distance of
280 feet is recommended to provide for a comfortable transition from the through lane
(1:10 taper rate or 130 feet) and stacking for several cars and a truck (150 feet).
• As an alternative to the tapers on Hudson Boulevard described in the two bullets above,
back-to-back left-turn lanes between the west access and the intersection with Keats
Avenue could be considered. The exhibit does not show improvements to the Hudson
Boulevard intersection with Keats Avenue, and no documentation was provided that
suggests poor traffic operations are expected. However, if the City anticipates issues,
this would be an opportunity to improve traffic operations.
• The proposed width of the shifted through lanes matches the existing lane widths on
Hudson Boulevard. The proposed left-turn lane on Hudson Boulevard would provide
acceptable width for the traffic operations. If the overall width of the road is a concern,
each lane width could be reduced to 11 feet. Although not typically desired, the reduced-
width lanes would provide a measure of traffic calming and still allow for sufficient traffic
operations.
• Hudson Road is posted as a bike route, and bicyclists are generally be expected to use
the existing 6-foot-wide shoulder when traveling on this road. While bicycle travel in a
vehicle lane of traffic is legal, maintaining a shoulder for bicyclists is a safer option. A
minimum 4-foot-wide shoulder would maintain the safety of the roadway shoulders for
bicyclists. The roadway shoulders could also be used by pedestrians.
Two sketches are attached to this memorandum that show potential redesign of Hudson
Boulevard. One shows the recommended turn lane length and appropriate tapers. The other
shows the potential back-to-back left-turn lanes on Hudson Road, assuming an improvement at
its intersection with Keats Avenue. It should be noted that any widening of Hudson Road should
sawcut and replace some or all of the existing shoulder. Without sufficient width, the newly
constructed roadway could fail to properly bond with the existing roadway and lead to future
maintenance issues.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the information presented in this
memorandum, please contact me at 651.726.7944 or bryant.ficek@tkda.com.
13
C IT
Y
OF
L
AK
E
E
LM
O
-
D
ES
I
G
N
G UIDELINES & S TANDARDS
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
3 Th
e
f
u
t
u
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
a
r
e
a
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
I
-
9
4
C
o
r
r
i
-
do
r
a
n
d
O
l
d
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
w
i
l
l
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
v
a
r
i
e
t
y
o
f
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
,
RI
À
F
H
U
H
W
D
L
O
D
Q
G
R
W
K
H
U
X
V
H
V
W
K
D
W
Z
L
O
O
V
H
U
Y
H
H
[
L
V
W
-
in
g
a
n
d
f
u
t
u
r
e
L
a
k
e
E
l
m
o
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
b
e
y
o
n
d
.
Wh
i
l
e
t
h
e
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
i
n
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
a
n
d
g
e
o
g
r
a
p
h
y
of
t
h
e
s
e
t
w
o
g
r
o
w
t
h
a
r
e
a
s
m
a
y
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
ty
p
e
s
o
f
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
,
i
t
i
s
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
t
o
e
s
-
ta
b
l
i
s
h
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
e
n
s
u
r
e
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
d
e
v
e
l
-
op
m
e
n
t
o
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
r
e
g
a
r
d
l
e
s
s
o
f
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
u
s
e
FO
D
V
V
L
À
F
D
W
L
R
Q
,
Q
W
K
H
F
R
P
P
H
U
F
L
D
O
G
L
V
W
U
L
F
W
V
T
X
D
O
L
W
\
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
o
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
o
f
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
o
f
h
i
g
h
ar
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
s
i
t
e
s
t
h
a
t
f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
w
e
l
l
f
o
r
al
l
u
s
e
r
s
,
b
o
t
h
d
r
i
v
e
r
s
a
n
d
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
.
A
.
S
i
t
e
D
e
s
i
g
n
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
P
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Go
a
l
:
T
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
a
c
c
e
s
s
a
n
d
c
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
l
l
u
s
-
er
s
i
n
a
P an
n
e
r
t
K at
P in
i
P i ]es
t
r
a
f
À c
d
i
s
r
u
S ti
o
n
an
d
s
a
f
e
t
y
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
s
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
s
g
o
o
d
si
g
h
t
l
i
n
e
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
t
r
e
e
t
.
a.
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
m
u
s
t
b
e
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
a
t
l
e
a
s
t
3
0
f
e
e
t
fr
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
o
f
w
a
y
.
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
e
n
-
co
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
o
b
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
a
s
c
l
o
s
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
st
r
e
e
t
a
s
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
w
h
i
l
e
s
t
i
l
l
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
s
e
t
-
ba
c
k
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
.
b.
T
h
e
o
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
o
n
o
n
e
si
t
e
m
u
s
t
b
e
c
l
e
a
r
l
y
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
d
.
c.
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
o
r
i
e
n
t
e
d
p
a
r
a
l
l
e
l
o
r
p
e
r
-
pe
n
d
i
c
u
l
a
r
t
o
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
t
h
e
y
f
r
o
n
t
,
p
r
o
m
o
t
i
n
g
co
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y
o
f
d
e
s
i
g
n
.
d.
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
r
r
a
n
g
e
d
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
c
o
n
v
e
-
QL
H
Q
W
D
F
F
H
V
V
W
R
H
Q
W
U
D
Q
F
H
V
D
Q
G
H
I
À
F
L
H
Q
W
R
Q
V
L
W
H
ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
a
n
d
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
.
e.
S
h
a
r
e
d
a
c
c
e
s
s
p
o
i
n
t
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
R
O
W
a
r
e
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
.
V
e
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
a
c
c
e
s
s
p
o
i
n
t
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
OL
P
L
W
H
G
W
R
P
L
Q
L
P
L
]
H
W
U
D
I
À
F
G
L
V
U
X
S
W
L
R
Q
f.
F
o
r
m
a
s
t
e
r
p
l
a
n
n
e
d
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,
t
h
e
p
r
o
v
i
-
si
o
n
o
f
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
d
o
p
e
n
o
r
g
a
t
h
e
r
i
n
g
s
p
a
c
e
s
i
s
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
.
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
:
•
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
(
C
)
•
C
o
n
v
e
n
i
e
n
c
e
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
(
C
C
)
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
d
g
a
t
h
e
r
i
n
g
s
p
a
c
e
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
d
i
s
t
i
n
c
t
i
v
e
a
n
d
w
e
l
c
o
m
i
n
g
s
p
a
c
e
f
o
r
v
i
s
i
t
o
r
s
.
14
C IT
Y
OF
L
AK
E
E
LM
O
-
D
ES
I
G
N
G
UI
D
E
L
I
N
E
S
&
S
TA
N
D
A
R
D
S
C OM
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
D
EV
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
St
r
e
e
t
s
c
a
p
e
Go
a
l
:
T
o
c
r
e
a
t
e
s
a
f
e
,
p
l
e
a
s
a
n
t
a
n
d
f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
p
e
-
de
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
p
a
c
e
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,
im
p
r
o
v
i
n
g
a
c
c
e
s
s
a
n
d
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
d
e
n
t
i
t
y
.
a.
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
a
r
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
a
l
o
n
g
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
s
t
r
e
e
t
fr
o
n
t
a
g
e
s
,
u
n
l
e
s
s
a
s
u
i
t
a
b
l
e
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
t
h
a
t
pr
o
m
o
t
e
s
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
a
c
c
e
s
s
s
a
f
e
t
y
i
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
.
In
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
a
c
c
e
s
s
t
o
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
fr
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
.
b.
S
t
r
e
e
t
t
r
e
e
s
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
a
t
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
n
t
e
r
-
va
l
s
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
o
f
w
a
y
.
c.
O
r
n
a
m
e
n
t
a
l
o
r
b
o
l
l
a
r
d
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
i
s
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
o
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
a
f
e
t
y
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
a
d
d
v
i
s
u
a
l
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
.
d.
F
e
n
c
i
n
g
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
a
r
o
u
n
d
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
d
i
n
-
in
g
a
r
e
a
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
t
o
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
a
r
e
a
s
or
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
.
e.
S
i
t
e
f
u
r
n
i
s
h
i
n
g
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
d
e
c
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
f
e
n
c
i
n
g
,
tr
a
s
h
r
e
c
e
p
t
a
c
l
e
s
,
p
l
a
n
t
e
r
s
,
b
i
c
y
c
l
e
r
a
c
k
s
,
a
n
d
be
n
c
h
e
s
a
r
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
.
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
s
a
r
e
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
o
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
si
t
e
a
m
e
n
i
t
i
e
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
L
a
k
e
E
l
m
o
B
r
a
n
d
i
n
g
&
Th
e
m
i
n
g
S
t
u
d
y
.
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
Go
a
l
:
T
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
o
f
a
h
i
g
h
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
qu
a
l
i
t
y
,
a
n
d
t
o
r
e
d
u
c
e
t
h
e
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
i
m
p
e
r
v
i
o
u
s
su
r
f
a
c
e
a
t
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
s
i
t
e
s
.
a.
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
,
p
u
b
l
i
c
a
n
d
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
c
a
p
e
a
r
e
a
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
ut
i
l
i
z
e
t
r
e
e
s
,
p
l
a
n
t
b
e
d
s
,
a
n
d
p
o
t
t
e
d
p
l
a
n
t
s
t
o
ad
d
v
i
s
u
a
l
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
a
n
d
b
r
e
a
k
u
p
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s
ha
r
d
s
c
a
p
e
.
b.
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
,
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
,
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
u
t
i
l
i
t
y
a
r
e
a
s
sh
o
u
l
d
b
e
b
u
f
f
e
r
e
d
b
y
p
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
s
.
N
e
a
r
a
r
e
a
s
of
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
c
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
,
t
h
e
s
e
p
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
no
t
e
x
c
e
e
d
4
f
e
e
t
i
n
h
e
i
g
h
t
f
o
r
s
a
f
e
t
y
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
.
c.
H
a
r
d
y
a
n
d
n
a
t
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
t
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
r
e
-
si
s
t
a
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
c
l
i
m
a
t
e
,
d
i
s
e
a
s
e
a
n
d
s
a
l
t
a
r
e
e
n
-
co
u
r
a
g
e
d
.
d.
M
a
k
i
n
g
u
s
e
o
f
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
p
l
a
n
t
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
a
s
a
d
j
a
-
ce
n
t
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
a
n
d
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
p
a
c
e
s
i
s
e
n
c
o
u
r
-
ag
e
d
t
o
c
r
e
a
t
e
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y
.
e.
M
a
t
u
r
e
t
r
e
e
s
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
o
n
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
i
t
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
be
r
e
t
a
i
n
e
d
w
h
e
n
e
v
e
r
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
.
f.
B
a
r
e
s
o
i
l
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
p
l
a
n
t
e
d
o
r
m
u
l
c
h
e
d
w
i
t
h
ba
r
k
,
s
t
o
n
e
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
su
i
t
a
b
l
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
t
o
av
o
i
d
u
n
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
ru
n
o
f
f
.
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Go
a
l
:
T
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
l
y
se
r
v
e
t
h
e
n
e
e
d
s
o
f
c
o
m
-
me
r
c
i
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
,
w
h
i
l
e
en
s
u
r
i
n
g
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
a
f
e
-
ty
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
a
p
o
s
i
-
ti
v
e
v
i
s
u
a
l
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
f
r
o
m
th
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
o
f
w
a
y
.
St
r
e
e
t
s
c
a
p
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
p
l
a
n
t
b
e
d
s
w
i
t
h
t
r
e
e
s
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
sh
a
d
e
a
n
d
a
d
d
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
v
a
l
u
e
a
l
o
n
g
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
.
Sidewalks within larger parking lots improve pedestrian circulation and safety.
Fe
n
c
i
n
g
a
r
o
u
n
d
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
d
i
n
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
h
e
l
p
s
d
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
e
p
e
d
e
s
-
tr
i
a
n
w
a
l
k
w
a
y
s
a
n
d
p
a
t
i
o
s
p
a
c
e
.
Bo
l
l
a
r
d
s
a
r
e
a
n
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
t
o
o
l
i
n
d
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
p
e
d
s
t
r
i
a
n
sp
a
c
e
.
T
h
i
s
s
t
y
l
e
o
f
b
o
l
l
a
r
d
i
s
d
r
a
w
n
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
L
a
k
e
E
l
m
o
Br
a
n
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
T
h
e
m
i
n
g
S
t
u
d
y
.
15
C IT
Y
OF
L
AK
E
E
LM
O
-
D
ES
I
G
N
G UIDELINES & S TANDARDS
C OM
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
D EVELOPMENT
a.
T
h
e
l
i
n
e
a
r
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
ar
e
a
s
p
a
r
a
l
l
e
l
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
t
r
e
e
t
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
-
ag
e
d
n
o
t
t
o
e
x
c
e
e
d
m
o
r
e
t
h
a
n
6
0
%
o
f
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
st
r
e
e
t
f
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
s
.
S
i
t
e
s
o
r
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
u
n
-
ab
l
e
t
o
m
e
e
t
t
h
i
s
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
o
in
s
t
a
l
l
b
e
r
m
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
al
o
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
o
f
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
pr
i
m
a
r
y
s
t
r
e
e
t
f
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
.
b.
T
h
e
e
n
t
r
a
n
c
e
t
o
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
l
o
-
ca
t
e
d
o
n
s
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
w
h
e
n
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
.
c.
S
h
a
r
e
d
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
us
e
s
o
r
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
e
s
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
w
h
e
n
p
o
s
-
si
b
l
e
t
o
a
v
o
i
d
e
x
c
e
s
s
i
v
e
a
m
o
u
n
t
s
o
f
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
.
d.
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
i
s
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
,
a
n
d
s
h
o
u
l
d
be
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
b
e
h
i
n
d
o
r
b
e
n
e
a
t
h
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
b
u
i
l
d
-
in
g
s
w
h
e
n
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
.
e.
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
o
r
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
b
e
-
ne
a
t
h
t
h
e
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
s
c
r
e
e
n
e
d
wi
t
h
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
h
a
t
m
a
t
c
h
t
h
e
p
r
i
-
ma
r
y
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
f.
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
s
c
r
e
e
n
e
d
f
r
o
m
v
i
e
w
of
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
b
y
m
e
a
n
s
o
f
g
r
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
/
o
r
la
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
.
g.
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
s
c
r
e
e
n
e
d
f
r
o
m
a
d
j
a
-
ce
n
t
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
w
i
t
h
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
s
t
r
i
p
s
n
o
t
e
x
-
ce
e
d
i
n
g
4
f
e
e
t
i
n
h
e
i
g
h
t
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
t
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
p
e
-
de
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
a
f
e
t
y
.
h.
L
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
d
i
s
l
a
n
d
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
su
r
f
a
c
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
t
o
b
r
e
a
k
u
p
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s
ha
r
d
s
c
a
p
e
a
n
d
r
e
d
u
c
e
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
i
m
p
e
r
-
vi
o
u
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
.
i.
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
m
u
s
t
b
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
i
n
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
at
n
i
g
h
t
f
o
r
s
a
f
e
t
y
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
.
H
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
d
i
r
e
c
t
gl
a
r
e
,
s
p
i
l
l
o
v
e
r
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
f
o
r
m
s
o
f
l
i
g
h
t
p
o
l
l
u
t
i
o
n
di
r
e
c
t
e
d
a
t
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
a
r
e
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
.
j.
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
m
u
s
t
b
e
A
D
A
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
t
w
h
e
n
de
e
m
e
d
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
.
De
l
i
v
e
r
y
,
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
,
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
A
r
e
a
s
Go
a
l
:
T
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
p
h
y
s
i
c
a
l
a
n
d
v
i
s
u
a
l
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
be
t
w
e
e
n
d
e
l
i
v
e
r
y
,
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
n
d
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
a
r
e
a
s
a
n
d
ar
e
a
s
o
f
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
a
n
d
a
u
t
o
m
o
b
i
l
e
c
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
a.
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
,
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
,
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
o
r
t
r
a
s
h
c
o
l
l
e
c
-
ti
o
n
a
r
e
a
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
o
f
t
h
e
v
i
e
w
IU
R
P
W
K
H
S
X
E
O
L
F
U
L
J
K
W
R
I
Z
D
\
R
U
V
L
J
Q
L
À
F
D
Q
W
O
\
sc
r
e
e
n
e
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
o
r
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
fe
a
t
u
r
e
s
.
b.
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
,
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
t
r
a
s
h
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
a
r
e
a
s
a
r
e
no
t
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
a
r
e
a
s
.
c.
T
h
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
d
e
l
i
v
e
r
y
,
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
r
-
ea
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
c
l
e
a
r
l
y
m
a
r
k
e
d
w
i
t
h
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
a
n
d
sh
o
u
l
d
n
o
t
i
n
t
e
r
f
e
r
e
w
i
t
h
o
t
h
e
r
a
u
t
o
m
o
b
i
l
e
o
r
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
c
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
d.
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
d
e
l
i
v
e
r
y
a
r
e
a
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
h
a
r
d
s
u
r
-
fa
c
e
,
m
i
n
i
m
i
z
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
p
e
r
s
a
l
o
f
d
u
s
t
.
B.
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
Fo
r
m
a
n
d
F
a
c
a
d
e
Go
a
l
:
T
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
o
f
h
i
g
h
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
qu
a
l
i
t
y
t
h
a
t
p
r
o
m
o
t
e
v
i
s
u
a
l
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
,
t
h
e
r
e
b
y
s
u
p
-
po
r
t
i
n
g
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
d
e
n
t
i
t
y
.
a.
B
l
a
n
k
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
a
n
d
d
o
o
r
s
a
r
e
di
s
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
.
A
l
l
s
i
d
e
s
o
f
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
h
a
v
e
ar
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
t
r
e
a
m
t
e
n
t
.
V
a
r
i
e
t
y
a
n
d
c
r
e
a
t
i
v
i
t
y
i
n
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
a
c
a
d
e
i
s
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
in
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
,
f
e
n
e
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
h
e
i
g
h
t
,
a
n
d
ro
o
f
l
i
n
e
s
,
e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y
o
n
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
t
h
a
t
fa
c
e
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
o
f
w
a
y
.
E
:
L
Q
G
R
Z
D
Q
G
G
R
R
U
V
W
\
O
H
V
V
K
D
O
O
U
H
Á
H
F
W
W
K
H
S
U
H
-
va
i
l
i
n
g
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
s
t
y
l
e
o
f
t
h
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
.
c.
G
r
o
u
n
d
l
e
v
e
l
r
e
t
a
i
l
a
n
d
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
VK
R
X
O
G
H
P
S
O
R
\
D
V
L
J
Q
L
À
F
D
Q
W
D
P
R
X
Q
W
R
I
W
U
D
Q
V
-
pa
r
e
n
t
g
l
a
s
s
i
n
t
h
e
f
o
r
m
o
f
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
a
n
d
d
o
o
r
s
,
pa
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
l
y
n
e
a
r
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
e
n
t
r
a
n
c
e
s
.
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
s
t
r
i
p
s
a
l
o
n
g
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
a
d
d
a
v
i
s
u
a
l
s
e
p
a
r
a
-
ti
o
n
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
.
Fa
c
a
d
e
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
w
i
t
h
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
d
e
t
a
i
l
ad
d
v
i
s
u
a
l
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
a
n
d
b
r
e
a
k
u
p
l
o
n
g
e
x
p
a
n
s
e
s
o
f
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
-
ou
s
f
a
ç
a
d
e
.
16
C IT
Y
OF
L
AK
E
E
LM
O
-
D
ES
I
G
N
G
UI
D
E
L
I
N
E
S
&
S
TA
N
D
A
R
D
S
C OM
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
D
EV
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
d.
M
i
n
i
m
i
z
i
n
g
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s
e
x
p
a
n
s
e
s
o
f
w
a
l
l
th
r
o
u
g
h
f
a
c
a
d
e
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
,
r
e
c
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
p
r
o
-
je
c
t
i
o
n
i
s
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
.
e.
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
o
r
i
e
n
t
e
d
t
o
w
a
r
d
s
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
st
r
e
e
t
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
a
c
-
ce
s
s
p
o
i
n
t
s
o
r
e
n
t
r
a
n
c
e
s
i
f
t
h
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
i
s
lo
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
r
e
a
r
o
f
t
h
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
.
f.
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
s
a
n
d
b
u
i
l
d
e
r
s
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
o
i
n
-
co
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
t
o
p
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
a
l
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
f
o
r
m
of
t
h
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
w
h
e
n
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
,
u
t
i
l
i
z
i
n
g
n
a
t
u
r
a
l
gr
a
d
e
s
t
o
c
r
e
a
t
e
u
n
i
q
u
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
.
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
Go
a
l
:
T
o
p
r
o
m
o
t
e
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
d
u
-
ra
b
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
v
i
s
u
a
l
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
s
,
t
h
e
r
e
b
y
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
di
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
d
e
n
t
i
t
y
.
a.
H
i
g
h
-
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
d
u
r
a
b
l
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
us
e
d
i
n
s
t
r
e
e
t
f
a
c
i
n
g
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
.
b.
P
r
i
m
a
r
y
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
f
o
r
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
VW
U
X
F
W
X
U
H
V
V
K
R
X
O
G
L
Q
F
O
X
G
H
E
U
L
F
N
À
Q
L
V
K
H
G
Z
R
R
G
st
o
n
e
,
c
a
s
t
s
t
o
n
e
,
o
r
p
r
e
-
c
a
s
t
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
p
a
n
e
l
s
wi
t
h
e
x
p
o
s
e
d
a
g
g
r
e
g
a
t
e
,
b
a
n
d
i
n
g
,
t
e
x
t
u
r
i
n
g
,
o
r
RW
K
H
U
V
L
P
L
O
D
U
G
H
F
R
U
D
W
L
Y
H
À
Q
L
V
K
W
U
H
D
W
P
H
Q
W
c.
H
i
g
h
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
s
y
n
t
h
e
t
i
c
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
t
h
a
t
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
-
ly
d
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
e
n
a
t
u
r
a
l
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
m
a
y
b
e
a
c
c
e
p
t
-
ab
l
e
i
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
,
b
u
t
n
o
t
li
m
i
t
e
d
t
o
,
t
h
i
n
b
r
i
c
k
,
h
a
r
d
i
p
l
a
n
k
,
d
e
c
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
co
n
c
r
e
t
e
m
a
s
o
n
r
y
,
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
.
d.
T
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
to
b
e
u
s
e
d
a
s
t
h
e
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
f
a
c
a
d
e
f
o
r
c
o
m
m
e
r
-
ci
a
l
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
:
•
U
n
p
a
i
n
t
e
d
g
a
l
v
a
n
i
z
e
d
m
e
t
a
l
8
Q
À
Q
L
V
K
H
G
´
J
U
H
H
Q
W
U
H
D
W
H
G
µ
O
X
P
E
H
U
8
Q
À
Q
L
V
K
H
G
Z
R
R
G
•
P
l
a
i
n
o
r
u
n
p
a
i
n
t
e
d
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
•
P
a
i
n
t
e
d
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
b
l
o
c
k
m
a
y
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
n
th
e
r
e
a
r
o
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
o
r
s
i
d
e
s
n
o
t
v
i
s
i
b
l
e
fr
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
o
f
w
a
y
.
•
V
i
n
y
l
s
i
d
i
n
g
H
)
D
F
D
G
H
F
R
O
R
U
V
V
K
R
X
O
G
U
H
Á
H
F
W
V
X
E
W
O
H
H
D
U
W
K
to
n
e
s
.
H
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
o
t
h
e
r
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
f
a
c
a
d
e
c
o
l
o
r
s
wi
l
l
b
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
R
e
v
i
e
w
A
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
.
A
c
-
ce
n
t
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
e
c
o
l
o
r
s
of
t
h
e
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
f
a
c
a
d
e
.
Sc
a
l
e
a
n
d
M
a
s
s
Go
a
l
:
T
o
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
a
h
u
-
ma
n
s
c
a
l
e
i
n
m
i
n
d
.
a.
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
b
r
o
k
e
n
d
o
w
n
i
n
t
o
s
m
a
l
l
e
r
pa
r
t
s
t
o
a
v
o
i
d
m
o
n
o
t
o
n
o
u
s
o
r
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s
d
e
-
si
g
n
a
n
d
t
h
e
a
p
p
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
o
f
m
a
s
s
.
b.
E
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
d
e
s
i
g
n
t
h
a
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
t
h
e
a
p
p
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
of
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
i
s
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
o
r
e
d
u
c
e
sc
a
l
e
a
n
d
m
i
n
i
m
i
z
e
m
a
s
s
.
c.
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
m
a
s
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
b
r
o
k
e
n
u
p
w
i
t
h
m
u
l
-
ti
p
l
e
r
o
o
f
a
n
d
r
i
d
g
e
l
i
n
e
s
p
e
r
p
e
n
d
i
c
u
l
a
r
w
i
t
h
o
n
e
an
o
t
h
e
r
.
d.
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
o
f
t
w
o
-
s
t
o
r
i
e
s
o
r
h
i
g
h
e
r
s
h
o
u
l
d
h
a
v
e
ar
t
i
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
t
o
m
i
n
i
m
i
z
e
t
h
e
a
p
p
e
a
r
-
an
c
e
o
f
m
a
s
s
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
r
o
o
f
l
i
n
e
s
wi
t
h
c
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
g
a
b
l
e
s
.
e.
S
c
a
l
e
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
r
e
d
u
c
e
d
b
y
u
t
i
l
i
z
i
n
g
“
s
t
e
p
-
do
w
n
”
m
e
t
h
o
d
s
t
o
w
a
r
d
s
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
t
r
e
e
t
.
E
n
-
tr
i
e
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
b
u
m
p
o
u
t
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
a
r
e
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
in
t
h
i
s
r
e
g
a
r
d
.
Pa
r
a
p
e
t
s
o
f
v
a
r
y
i
n
g
h
e
i
g
h
t
s
a
d
d
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
a
n
d
ac
c
e
n
t
u
a
t
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
e
n
t
r
i
e
s
.
Hi
g
h
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
d
u
r
a
b
l
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
a
d
d
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
va
l
u
e
a
n
d
c
r
e
a
t
e
a
m
o
r
e
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
v
e
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
.
17
C IT
Y
OF
L
AK
E
E
LM
O
-
D
ES
I
G
N
G UIDELINES & S TANDARDS
C OM
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
D EVELOPMENT
Ro
o
f
D
e
s
i
g
n
Go
a
l
:
T
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
i
n
r
o
o
f
d
e
s
i
g
n
i
n
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
s
t
r
u
c
-
tu
r
e
,
a
n
d
t
o
r
e
d
u
c
e
t
h
e
v
i
s
u
a
l
i
m
p
a
c
t
o
f
r
o
o
f
t
o
p
eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
.
a.
T
h
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
o
f
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
m
u
s
t
b
e
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
th
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
e
o
r
d
e
s
i
g
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
.
b.
P
a
r
a
p
e
t
s
o
f
v
a
r
y
i
n
g
h
e
i
g
h
t
s
a
r
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
f
o
r
OD
U
J
H
F
R
P
P
H
U
F
L
D
O
E
X
L
O
G
L
Q
J
V
Z
L
W
K
Á
D
W
U
R
R
I
V
F
5
R
R
I
W
R
S
H
T
X
L
S
P
H
Q
W
S
D
U
W
L
F
X
O
D
U
O
\
R
Q
Á
D
W
U
R
R
I
V
mu
s
t
b
e
s
c
r
e
e
n
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
p
a
r
a
p
e
t
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
a
r
-
ch
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
.
En
t
r
i
e
s
Go
a
l
:
T
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
i
d
e
n
t
i
À ab
l
e
e
n
t
r
y
w
a
y
s
t
h
a
t
e
m
-
ph
a
s
i
z
e
a
c
c
e
s
s
,
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
a
f
e
t
y
,
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
qu
a
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
a
h
u
m
a
n
s
c
a
l
e
.
a.
E
n
t
r
y
w
a
y
s
t
o
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
ac
c
e
s
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
of
w
a
y
.
L
a
r
g
e
r
e
t
a
i
l
s
i
t
e
s
i
n
p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
s
h
o
u
l
d
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
i
n
g
a
d
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
w
a
y
.
b.
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
i
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
in
t
o
e
n
t
r
y
w
a
y
s
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
f
a
c
a
d
e
d
e
t
a
i
l
i
n
g
o
r
pr
o
m
i
n
e
n
t
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
.
c.
T
h
e
u
s
e
o
f
c
a
n
o
p
i
e
s
,
a
w
n
i
n
g
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
s
h
e
l
-
te
r
i
n
g
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
.
d.
P
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
a
m
e
n
i
t
i
e
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
t
r
a
s
h
r
e
c
e
p
t
a
-
cl
e
s
,
b
e
n
c
h
e
s
,
o
r
l
i
g
h
t
e
d
b
o
l
l
a
r
d
s
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
-
ag
e
d
n
e
a
r
e
n
t
r
y
w
a
y
s
t
o
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
Li
g
h
t
i
n
g
Go
a
l
:
T
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
s
a
f
e
t
y
o
f
p
a
t
r
o
n
s
,
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
,
p
e
-
de
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
a
n
d
a
u
t
o
m
o
b
i
l
e
s
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
vi
s
u
a
l
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
v
a
l
u
e
t
o
a
s
i
t
e
,
w
h
i
l
e
li
m
i
t
i
n
g
l
i
g
h
t
p
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
n
i
g
h
t
s
k
y
t
o
t
h
e
b
e
s
t
ex
t
e
n
t
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
.
a.
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
m
u
s
t
b
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
i
n
e
n
t
r
y
w
a
y
s
,
p
a
r
k
-
in
g
a
r
e
a
s
,
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
w
a
y
s
,
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
e
r
-
vi
c
e
a
r
e
a
s
,
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
a
d
-
di
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
a
f
e
t
y
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
.
b.
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
h
e
i
g
h
t
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
e
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
.
c.
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
s
t
y
l
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
y
t
o
th
e
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
s
t
y
l
e
o
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
d.
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
us
e
d
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
c
c
e
n
t
a
n
d
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
as
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
e
n
t
r
y
w
a
y
.
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
li
g
h
t
i
n
g
m
u
s
t
b
e
d
o
w
n
c
a
s
t
a
n
d
s
h
i
e
l
d
e
d
t
o
p
r
e
-
ve
n
t
l
i
g
h
t
p
o
l
l
u
t
i
o
n
.
e.
B
o
l
l
a
r
d
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
i
s
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
f
o
r
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
ar
e
a
s
.
f.
O
v
e
r
h
e
a
d
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
m
u
s
t
b
e
s
h
i
e
l
d
e
d
t
o
p
r
e
v
e
n
t
li
g
h
t
t
r
e
s
p
a
s
s
a
n
d
s
p
i
l
l
-
o
v
e
r
o
n
t
o
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
.
g.
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
n
e
a
r
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
z
o
n
e
s
m
u
s
t
ut
i
l
i
z
e
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
m
i
n
i
m
i
z
e
s
l
i
g
h
t
t
r
e
s
p
a
s
s
.
h.
B
a
r
e
b
u
l
b
a
n
d
e
x
p
o
s
e
d
n
e
o
n
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
a
r
e
n
o
t
al
l
o
w
e
d
.
Si
g
n
a
g
e
Go
a
l
:
T
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
t
h
a
t
c
l
e
a
r
l
y
i
d
e
n
t
i
À es
bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
e
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
,
w
h
i
l
e
pr
o
m
o
t
i
n
g
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
i
n
t
e
r
m
s
o
f
d
e
-
si
g
n
a
n
d
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
.
a.
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
y
to
t
h
e
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
t
y
l
e
o
f
t
h
e
s
u
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
o
r
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
.
b.
S
i
g
n
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
b
e
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
e
d
f
o
r
c
o
n
s
i
s
-
te
n
c
y
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
c
a
l
e
,
c
o
l
o
r
,
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
m
a
t
e
r
i
-
al
s
.
c.
S
i
g
n
s
m
u
s
t
b
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
o
f
h
i
g
h
-
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
,
d
u
-
ra
b
l
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
.
d.
D
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
t
o
d
e
l
i
v
e
r
y
,
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
n
d
st
o
r
a
g
e
a
r
e
a
s
i
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
.
e.
T
w
o
a
n
d
t
h
r
e
e
-
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
a
l
s
i
g
n
s
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
-
ag
e
d
t
o
p
r
o
m
o
t
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
v
i
t
y
a
n
d
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
d
e
n
t
i
t
y
.
f.
A
l
l
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
o
i
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
e
l
-
em
e
n
t
s
o
f
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
t
h
e
m
i
n
g
i
n
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
si
g
n
a
g
e
,
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
a
n
d
c
i
t
y
i
d
e
n
t
i
t
y
.
Si
g
n
a
g
e
s
h
o
u
l
d
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
e
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
s
t
y
l
e
o
f
t
h
e
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
Looking west down Hudson Blvd. towards Keats Ave. Looking east down Hudson Blvd. towards the subject property
The subject property looking southwest from Hudson Blvd. The subject property looking south towards I-94 and Keats Ave. N.
Proposed Kwik Trip Location: Site Visit, 7/9/14
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 7/14/14
AGENDA ITEM: 4B – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2014-39
ITEM: RAD-ALT Comprehensive Plan Amendment
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission has, at multiple times over the past year or so, discuss the City’s rural
development areas and made some specific recommendations to the City Council concerning
potential revisions to the these rural development areas as described in the Comprehensive Plan. One
of the previous recommendations from the Planning Commission was that the City Council adopt a
moratorium on any development on properties that are guided for Rural Area Development –
Alternative Density (RAD-ALT) in the Comprehensive Plan until the City’s revised 2040 Met
Council forecast numbers were finalized. The City Council did not support a moratorium, and
instead directed Staff to revisit this matter once the work on the forecast numbers has been
completed.
With the Met Council’s adoption of its “Thrive 2040” report, which includes the 2040 population and
household forecasts for all metro communities, Staff is asking the Planning Commission to again
consider the status of the RAD-ALT future land use category, and to make a recommendation to the
City Council concerning this aspect of the Comprehensive Plan. Based on Lake Elmo’s decreased
forecast numbers, Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend elimination of
the RAD-ALT land use category from the Comprehensive Plan and that all parcels currently guided
for RAD-ALT development be changed to RAD.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City initiated action
Property Owners: 3M Corporation, Irvin Friedrich, Emerson Properties LP
Location: PID Numbers 16.029.21.24.0002; 15.029.21.31.0001; 25.029.21.44.0001
(commonly referred to as the “3M Property, Irvin Friedrich Property, and
Emerson Property”)
Request: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of the
subject properties from RAD-ALT to RAD
Existing Land Use: Single Family Residential/Agricultural/Agricultural Outbuildings
Existing Zoning: RR – Rural Residential
Surrounding Land Uses: Single Family Residential, Agricultural, Park
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a – PUBLIC HEARING
2
Surrounding Zoning: RS – Rural Single Family; RR – Rural Residential; A – Agriculture, OP
– Open Space Preservation
Comprehensive Plan: RAD-ALT (Rural Agricultural Density Alternate Density); 2.0 units per
acre
Proposed Comp Plan: RAD (Rural Agricultural Density); 0.45 units per acre
History: The City revised its Comprehensive Plan for rural areas in the early-mid 1990’s to
allow for open space developments. The amendments from this time period limited
the use of the Residential Estates as a future land use and instead encouraged any
future development of land to be consistent with the City’s open space regulations.
The RAD-2 category was added to the Plan in 2005 in response to Met Council
growth directives. The City changed the future land use designation of the Friedrich
property to RAD-2 in 2010. As part of the City’s general 2010 Comprehensive Plan
updates, the terminology for RAD-2 changed to RAD-ALT (with the same density of
2 units per acre)
Deadline for Action: None
Applicable Regulations: Comprehensive Plan – Chapter III: Land Use Plan
Zoning Ordinance – Article 9: Rural District Standards
Section 154.067 – OP2 Zoning Regulations
REQUEST DETAILS
The Planning Commission has spent a fair amount of time over the past year discussing issues
associated with rural development areas. Given the extensive amount of information shared with the
Commission related to these previous reviews, Staff will not be providing any new information at
this time, and has instead attached these previous reports comprised of the following:
Report Date Subject
5/29/13 General overview and discussion of RAD and RAD-ALT land uses. No
recommendation from the Planning Commission.
10/28/13 Detailed analysis of rural development areas and population projections
for Lake Elmo and review of key discussion topics. Planning
Commission recommended further study of RAD-ALT and Residential
Estates land uses.
11/13/13 Further analysis of RAD-ALT and RE (Residential Estates) land use
categories, with specific options for consideration. Planning
Commission recommended moratorium on RAD-ALT development;
City Council rejected recommendation.
1/13/14 Consideration of specific Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the
future land use designation of the Friedrich property (9434 Stillwater
Boulevard North) from RAD-ALT to RAD. Planning Commission
recommended approval of the amendment to change the land use; City
Council vote to approve amendment failed.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING
3
During the course of these reviews, it was noted that a key factor in determining the appropriate
course of action for any land use changes in the City would be the 2040 Met Council population and
household forecasts for the region. In particular, the Planning Commission’s original rationale for
recommending a moratorium on RAD-ALT development in November of 2013 was to allow time for
the forecast numbers to be finalized. The Commission specifically noted during its review that it
wanted to make a formal recommendation concerning the RAD-ALT properties once the forecast
was finalized. Now that the forecast has been finalized, Staff is bringing this matter back for further
review by the Commission.
Staff has scheduled a public hearing on this matter, and provided written notice to the three affected
property owners.
BACKGROUND/PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES
The complete set of 2040 Thrive forecast numbers are attached to this report, along with a summary
of the forecast process and results. For the City of Lake Elmo, the previous and revised numbers are
as follows:
Forecast Population Households
2030 (OLD) 24,000 8,727
2040 (NEW) 20,500 8,000
The 2040 forecast represents a decrease of 3,500 persons and 727 households from the numbers that
are current included in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. In practice, these revised forecast will be
used as a basis for Lake Elmo’s next decennial Comprehensive Plan update that must be submitted to
the Met Council in 2018. In addition to the revise 2040 forecast, the City and Met Council have also
recently negotiated the termination of the Memorandum of Understanding between the two parties,
which eliminates any mandates for growth that were previously in place. What this means for Lake
Elmo is that the population and household numbers in the current Comprehensive Plan represent a
forecast rather than a requirement for growth, and provides the City with some additional flexibility
for implanting its plan.
Please note that any future Comprehensive Plan amendments must still be consistent with the City’s
Systems Statement, which is a document prepared by the Met Council that includes the relevant
information that must be addressed in the City decennial Comprehensive Plan updates. The Lake
Elmo System Statement from 2008 is still in effect and must still be used for long range planning
purposes. Additionally, any future amendments to the City’s Land Use Plan are subject to review by
the Met Council, and the 2040 forecast numbers are still part of the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Because Lake Elmo has historically been in an unusual situation with the Met Council regarding the
City’s Comprehensive Plan (compared to other metro communities), the revised forecast will give
the City some flexibility in the short term. Any substantial changes to the Comprehensive Plan will
be subject to a more extensive review; however, and Staff is not recommending such changes in
advance of the 2018 decennial update. Staff anticipates having further discussions with the Planning
Commission on minor updates (including additional rural area development options) later this year.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING
4
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
For the reasons noted in greater detail in the attached Staff reports, and based on previous Planning
Commission discussions, Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend
amending the Comprehensive Plan to eliminate the RAD-ALT land use category. The two key
factors in this recommendation include:
• The finalization of the 2040 community forecast for Lake Elmo, which reduces the total
population by the City by 3,500 persons.
• The elimination of the MOU between the Met Council and Lake Elmo, which removes any
specific population mandates and the related penalties for failure to achieve growth
requirements.
With these changes, the pressure to allow additional growth in the City’s rural development areas is
greatly diminished, and the RAD-ALT areas are no longer necessary to achieve the previous
household and populations totals. The City Council has also previously responded to the draft
forecast numbers with a specific proposal for recommended growth in the Cities rural and sewered
development areas. Although the final forecast numbers are higher than requested by the Council,
they still will allow for reductions in the rural areas as proposed by the Council.
There are three parcels affected by the proposed land use change, and approximately 157 acres are
currently guided for the RAD-ALT land use, which corresponds to roughly 314 units of housing.
The three areas that have been assigned this designation include the following parcels:
PIN Owner Area (acres)
16.029.21.24.0002 3M Company 96
15.029.21.31.0001 Irvin Friedrich 24
25.029.21.44.0001 Terry Emerson 37
In developing more specific findings to support its recommendation, Staff is proposing draft findings
in the next section that have been brought forward (with minor modifications) from previous
Planning Commission meetings:
DRAFT FINDINGS
1) That the Planning Commission has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Amendment in
accordance with the procedures as established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department
and Lake Elmo Planning Commission.
2) That the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 14, 2014 consistent
with these procedures.
3) That the proposed amendment is to eliminate the RAD-ALT (Rural Area Development
Alternate Density) future land use category from the Future Land Use map and as
referenced in other portions of the plan. The amendment will change all parcels that are
currently guided as RAD-ALT (2.0 units per acre) to RAD – Rural Agricultural Density
(0.45 units per acre).
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING
5
4) That the revised Met Council “Thrive 2040” population and household forecast for the
City of Lake Elmo and the elimination of the 2005 MOU between the City and Met
Council has reduced the pressure for additional growth and development within the
City’s rural development (unsewered) areas.
5) That higher density residential development is encouraged in areas that will be served by
public sanitary sewer where the provision of these services is more cost-effective and
where the City has either invested or is planning to invest in significant infrastructure
improvements.
6) That the Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan specifically states that any future
higher density housing in Lake Elmo, including senior-specific housing, will be best
accommodated within the Old Village Area or I-94 corridor due to proximity to goods,
services, and public facilities.
7) That the three existing parcels guided for RAD-ALT development do not demonstrate
any characteristics that are substantially different from other areas guided for RAD
development in the City of Lake Elmo or that would indicate that higher density
development is more appropriate in this area than any other site within the City.
8) That the City is has recently adopted major Comprehensive Plan amendment related to
development in the Old Village Area and the I-94 corridor. Given the current market
conditions, the City encourages higher density development in areas that would help off-
set the significant infrastructure costs required to serve these areas.
9) That higher density housing is not consistent with the City’s stated goals to preserve and
enhance its rural character, especially when planned in areas that are guided for Rural
Agricultural Density.
10) That build-out of existing empty lots in platted and developed OP developments is
encouraged over the creation of new development and service areas in the community
11) That new access that would be needed to support development on the existing RAD-ALT
parcels does not conform to the City’s Transportation Plan that encourages limited access
to major collector roads and is inconsistent with the City’s access spacing guidelines.
12) That the 2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendment for property at 9434 Stillwater
Boulevard North was designed to accommodate a specific development proposal which
no longer exists.
13) That no development proposals have come forward since 2005 for the other two sites that
area guided for RAD-ALT development.
14) That recent Met Council projections of population and household growth indicate less
overall population growth than was expected in 2010.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING
6
15) That the support of local neighbors for the 2010 development proposal at 9434 Stillwater
Boulevard North was based on a misunderstanding of the details of the proposal. The
2010 Planning Commission recommendation was significantly driven by the support of
neighbors, which support no longer exists.
16) That the Planning Commission and City Council have become more educated and
experienced in considering higher density development. Such development should not be
considered for land not guided for sewer before 2030.
17) That the 2005 Comprehensive Plan that added two sites for RAD-ALT development and
the subsequent 2010 action to add another property to this future land use designation
could be considered spot zoning based on later information and training received by the
Planning Commission. Specifically, the sites guided for RAD-ALT development are
isolated and not connected to any other parcel or area that has a similar land use
guidance.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a Comprehensive Plan
amendment to eliminate the RAD-ALT (Rural Area Development Alternate Density) future land
use category from the Future Land Use map and as referenced in other portions of the Plan and
to change all parcels that are currently guided as RAD-ALT (2.0 units per acre) to RAD – Rural
Agricultural Density (0.45 units per acre).
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Map Amendment
2. Thrive MSP 2040 Forecasts
3. MetroStats Policy Document - Thrive 2040
4. Previous Rural Development Review Staff Reports:
a. January 13, 2014
b. November 13, 2013
c. October 28, 2013
d. May 29, 2013
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ....................................................... Community Development Director
- Report by Staff .................................................. Community Development Director
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Public Hearing Comments ............................................................................... Chair
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING
Sou rces : Was hi ngton C ou nty & M etr o GIS12-30 -2 01 3
5
Planne d La nd U se
Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan 2030
Map 3 -3
Municipal Boundar y
Proposed A mendment:RA D-ALT to R A D
Proposed Future Land Use M ap A m endments:All E xisting RA D-A LT P arc els
Thrive MSP 2040 Forecasts
Adopted May 28, 2014
◊ = Rogers annexed Hassan Township in 2012; forecasts have been combined.
† = Laketown Township will be fully annexed before 2030; forecast has been reassigned to neighboring cities.
(pt) denotes part of a city; remainder of city is in neighboring county.
2000 2010 2040 2000 2010 2040 2000 2010 2040
ANOKA COUNTY
Andover 26,588 30,598 40,700 8,107 9,811 15,400 3,583 4,669 6,200
Anoka 18,076 17,142 20,100 7,262 7,060 8,900 13,489 12,840 14,600
Bethel 443 466 580 149 174 250 229 86 530
Blaine (pt)45,014 57,186 86,000 15,926 21,077 33,000 16,757 19,668 26,600
Centerville 3,202 3,792 4,200 1,077 1,315 1,700 363 409 500
Circle Pines 4,663 4,918 5,300 1,697 2,006 2,300 2,150 790 1,450
Columbia Heights 18,520 19,496 21,700 8,033 7,926 9,300 6,397 3,484 5,300
Columbus 3,957 3,914 5,300 1,328 1,416 2,200 507 1,172 1,850
Coon Rapids 61,607 61,476 72,500 22,578 23,532 29,300 21,682 23,260 35,700
East Bethel 10,941 11,626 18,200 3,607 4,060 7,400 1,374 1,123 2,200
Fridley 27,449 27,208 29,400 11,328 11,110 12,800 26,257 21,333 29,800
Ham Lake 12,710 15,296 17,300 4,139 5,171 7,100 3,194 2,931 4,480
Hilltop 766 744 1,100 400 380 550 257 314 360
Lexington 2,142 2,049 2,300 819 787 1,000 634 467 700
Lino Lakes 16,791 20,216 29,000 4,857 6,174 10,600 2,671 3,313 6,000
Linwood Township 4,668 5,123 4,700 1,578 1,884 2,000 154 219 430
Nowthen 3,557 4,443 5,400 1,123 1,450 2,100 337 318 720
Oak Grove 6,903 8,031 10,200 2,200 2,744 4,100 359 741 1,010
Ramsey 18,510 23,668 32,800 5,906 8,033 13,000 4,008 4,779 7,600
St. Francis 4,910 7,218 12,500 1,638 2,520 5,100 1,247 1,537 3,000
Spring Lake Park (pt)6,667 6,234 6,800 2,676 2,597 3,100 4,401 2,934 3,670
Anoka County Total 298,084 330,844 426,080 106,428 121,227 171,200 110,050 106,387 152,700
CARVER COUNTY
Benton Township 939 786 740 307 297 300 282 274 350
Camden Township 955 922 830 316 329 330 15 56 60
Carver 1,266 3,724 15,000 458 1,182 5,600 176 187 1,700
Chanhassen (pt)20,321 22,952 36,200 6,914 8,352 14,000 8,366 9,746 16,240
Chaska 17,603 23,770 34,900 6,169 8,816 14,200 10,955 11,123 16,800
Cologne 1,012 1,519 4,600 385 539 1,900 294 270 470
Dahlgren Township 1,453 1,331 720 479 494 300 203 202 200
Hamburg 538 513 600 206 201 250 117 109 150
Hancock Township 367 345 410 121 127 170 35 10 10
Hollywood Township 1,102 1,041 1,200 371 387 500 100 90 150
Laketown Township †2,331 2,243 - 637 660 - 355 116 -
Mayer 554 1,749 3,000 199 589 1,200 92 151 200
New Germany 346 372 1,400 143 146 600 50 46 90
Norwood Young America 3,108 3,549 8,800 1,171 1,389 3,900 1,559 1,165 2,300
San Francisco Township 888 832 960 293 307 400 61 46 100
Victoria 4,025 7,345 15,000 1,367 2,435 5,700 932 1,502 2,270
Waconia 6,814 10,697 22,100 2,568 3,909 8,900 4,082 5,578 10,200
Waconia Township 1,284 1,228 1,500 429 434 600 72 98 400
Watertown 3,029 4,205 6,700 1,078 1,564 2,900 682 556 1,220
Watertown Township 1,432 1,204 1,100 478 468 500 207 392 400
Young America Township 838 715 760 267 266 300 105 119 120
Carver County Total 70,205 91,042 156,520 24,356 32,891 62,550 28,740 31,836 53,430
POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS EMPLOYMENT
2000 2010 2040 2000 2010 2040 2000 2010 2040
POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS EMPLOYMENT
DAKOTA COUNTY
Apple Valley 45,527 49,084 65,600 16,344 18,875 26,500 12,106 14,279 19,500
Burnsville 60,220 60,306 66,700 23,687 24,283 27,700 31,765 31,593 44,100
Castle Rock Township 1,495 1,342 1,300 514 504 520 344 356 360
Coates 163 161 150 64 66 70 252 109 110
Douglas Township 760 716 790 235 259 320 96 92 100
Eagan 63,557 64,206 79,000 23,773 25,249 31,500 42,750 49,526 70,200
Empire Township 1,638 2,444 5,300 515 792 2,000 217 255 300
Eureka Township 1,490 1,426 1,700 496 518 700 196 460 460
Farmington 12,365 21,086 31,500 4,169 7,066 12,000 3,986 4,438 7,200
Greenvale Township 684 803 890 227 275 350 68 49 630
Hampton 434 689 780 156 245 300 178 127 160
Hampton Township 986 903 1,100 320 329 450 186 85 90
Hastings (pt)18,201 22,172 30,100 6,640 8,735 12,900 8,872 8,532 11,300
Inver Grove Heights 29,751 33,880 47,600 11,257 13,476 19,900 8,168 9,442 14,000
Lakeville 43,128 55,954 82,900 13,609 18,683 30,500 10,966 13,862 23,400
Lilydale 552 623 1,000 338 375 600 354 355 420
Marshan Township 1,263 1,106 1,300 404 403 520 220 117 370
Mendota 197 198 320 80 78 130 266 270 300
Mendota Heights 11,434 11,071 13,400 4,178 4,378 5,300 8,549 11,550 14,400
Miesville 135 125 130 52 52 60 97 116 140
New Trier 116 112 150 31 41 50 30 35 60
Nininger Township 865 950 950 280 372 400 165 149 340
Northfield (pt)557 1,147 2,100 216 414 900 79 470 500
Randolph 318 436 440 117 168 180 123 122 130
Randolph Township 536 659 650 192 246 280 130 113 120
Ravenna Township 2,355 2,336 2,500 734 780 1,000 115 38 60
Rosemount 14,619 21,874 36,300 4,742 7,587 14,000 6,356 6,721 13,900
Sciota Township 285 414 500 92 140 190 21 33 500
South St. Paul 20,167 20,160 22,500 8,123 8,186 9,600 7,697 8,557 11,000
Sunfish Lake 504 521 520 173 183 210 23 8 10
Vermillion 437 419 410 160 156 170 221 93 210
Vermillion Township 1,243 1,192 1,700 395 424 660 280 90 90
Waterford Township 517 497 560 193 193 240 461 679 820
West St. Paul 19,405 19,540 23,900 8,645 8,529 10,500 8,905 7,471 10,600
Dakota County Total 355,904 398,552 524,740 131,151 152,060 210,700 154,242 170,192 245,880
HENNEPIN COUNTY
Bloomington 85,172 82,893 93,600 36,400 35,905 41,000 104,548 86,530 111,000
Brooklyn Center 29,172 30,104 34,700 11,430 10,756 13,600 16,698 11,001 15,400
Brooklyn Park 67,388 75,781 95,500 24,432 26,229 35,500 23,692 24,084 42,000
Champlin 22,193 23,089 25,500 7,425 8,328 10,000 2,734 4,012 5,600
Chanhassen (pt)- - - - - - 979 1,159 1,160
Corcoran 5,630 5,379 11,900 1,784 1,867 4,700 1,792 1,093 2,200
Crystal 22,698 22,151 23,300 9,389 9,183 10,000 5,638 3,929 5,500
Dayton (pt)4,693 4,617 10,600 1,546 1,619 4,500 1,057 921 3,000
Deephaven 3,853 3,642 3,900 1,373 1,337 1,400 1,021 688 820
Eden Prairie 54,901 60,797 84,800 20,457 23,930 34,000 51,006 48,775 70,000
Edina 47,425 47,941 53,300 20,996 20,672 23,000 52,991 47,457 56,100
Excelsior 2,393 2,188 2,600 1,199 1,115 1,300 1,823 2,220 2,200
Fort Snelling (unorg.)442 149 350 - 135 200 35,526 23,215 26,000
Golden Valley 20,281 20,371 24,300 8,449 8,816 10,300 30,142 33,194 41,500
Greenfield 2,544 2,777 4,100 817 936 1,600 337 613 750
Greenwood 729 688 810 285 290 300 161 82 350
Hanover (pt)332 609 520 113 196 200 86 36 50
Hopkins 17,367 17,591 21,600 8,359 8,366 10,000 11,979 11,009 14,000
2000 2010 2040 2000 2010 2040 2000 2010 2040
POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS EMPLOYMENT
Independence 3,236 3,504 5,400 1,088 1,241 2,200 169 587 770
Long Lake 1,842 1,768 2,100 756 732 1,000 2,510 1,093 1,930
Loretto 570 650 670 225 269 300 661 366 370
Maple Grove 50,365 61,567 84,800 17,532 22,867 33,000 18,309 29,877 49,500
Maple Plain 2,088 1,768 2,300 770 723 1,000 1,792 1,579 1,750
Medicine Lake 368 371 400 159 160 170 10 15 100
Medina 4,005 4,892 9,000 1,309 1,702 3,500 3,254 3,351 4,580
Minneapolis 382,747 382,578 466,400 162,352 163,540 202,700 308,127 281,732 356,000
Minnetonka 51,102 49,734 63,000 21,267 21,901 27,500 51,276 44,228 63,200
Minnetonka Beach 614 539 610 215 201 220 201 174 250
Minnetrista 4,358 6,384 13,000 1,505 2,176 5,000 379 665 740
Mound 9,435 9,052 10,500 3,982 3,974 4,800 1,811 1,165 1,900
New Hope 20,873 20,339 22,800 8,665 8,427 9,800 13,565 11,080 15,300
Orono 7,538 7,437 9,400 2,766 2,826 3,900 1,110 1,562 1,780
Osseo 2,434 2,430 3,100 1,035 1,128 1,500 2,312 1,749 2,530
Plymouth 65,894 70,576 87,800 24,820 28,663 35,500 53,491 46,227 66,500
Richfield 34,310 35,228 39,900 15,073 14,818 17,500 11,762 15,604 18,400
Robbinsdale 14,123 13,953 15,300 6,097 6,032 6,800 7,109 6,858 7,600
Rockford (pt)144 426 800 57 184 400 384 94 550
Rogers ◊6,051 11,197 21,300 1,973 3,748 8,200 5,414 7,907 14,800
St. Anthony (pt)5,664 5,156 6,300 2,402 2,210 3,000 1,992 1,626 2,090
St. Bonifacius 1,873 2,283 2,200 681 863 900 436 478 500
St. Louis Park 44,102 45,250 54,500 20,773 21,743 25,500 40,696 40,485 49,100
Shorewood 7,400 7,307 7,400 2,529 2,658 3,000 782 1,113 1,200
Spring Park 1,717 1,669 2,200 930 897 1,100 1,028 583 700
Tonka Bay 1,547 1,475 1,500 614 586 680 266 298 570
Wayzata 4,113 3,688 4,900 1,929 1,795 2,300 6,268 4,567 5,900
Woodland 480 437 540 173 169 180 22 8 20
Hennepin County Total 1,116,206 1,152,425 1,429,500 456,131 475,913 603,250 877,346 805,089 1,066,260
RAMSEY COUNTY
Arden Hills 9,652 9,552 13,500 2,959 2,957 4,600 12,326 12,402 18,400
Blaine (pt)- - - - - - 677 893 1,000
Falcon Heights 5,572 5,321 5,300 2,103 2,131 2,200 4,190 5,298 6,800
Gem Lake 419 393 590 139 155 250 586 526 640
Lauderdale 2,364 2,379 2,400 1,150 1,130 1,200 360 718 1,000
Little Canada 9,771 9,773 11,100 4,375 4,393 4,900 5,960 5,467 8,700
Maplewood 35,258 38,018 47,900 13,758 14,882 19,700 29,259 27,635 36,600
Mounds View 12,738 12,155 13,100 5,018 4,954 5,500 4,170 6,386 8,200
New Brighton 22,206 21,456 26,000 9,013 8,915 11,200 11,007 9,213 13,500
North Oaks 3,883 4,469 4,900 1,300 1,746 2,100 1,091 1,260 1,300
North St. Paul 11,929 11,460 13,100 4,703 4,615 5,700 3,499 2,942 3,610
Roseville 33,690 33,660 38,700 14,598 14,623 17,000 39,211 35,104 44,100
St. Anthony (pt)2,348 3,070 4,300 1,295 1,638 2,000 1,390 1,357 2,050
St. Paul 286,840 285,068 334,700 112,109 111,001 137,600 188,124 175,933 218,000
Shoreview 25,924 25,043 27,500 10,125 10,402 11,300 9,938 11,665 15,500
Spring Lake Park (pt)105 178 220 48 75 100 202 66 100
Vadnais Heights 13,069 12,302 14,500 5,064 5,066 6,300 7,164 6,678 12,600
White Bear Township 11,293 10,949 12,000 4,010 4,261 4,900 2,131 2,309 4,780
White Bear Lake (pt)23,974 23,394 27,500 9,469 9,747 12,000 12,020 11,085 11,800
Ramsey County Total 511,035 508,640 597,310 201,236 202,691 248,550 333,305 316,937 408,680
2000 2010 2040 2000 2010 2040 2000 2010 2040
POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS EMPLOYMENT
SCOTT COUNTY
Belle Plaine 3,789 6,661 13,300 1,396 2,362 5,300 1,428 1,847 3,300
Belle Plaine Township 806 878 820 266 310 320 77 69 70
Blakeley Township 496 418 370 166 165 170 70 69 100
Cedar Lake Township 2,197 2,779 3,600 719 939 1,400 91 82 340
Credit River Township 3,895 5,096 5,000 1,242 1,662 1,900 265 397 420
Elko New Market 804 4,110 12,200 286 1,259 4,500 248 317 840
Helena Township 1,440 1,648 1,700 450 548 700 473 147 150
Jackson Township 1,361 1,464 1,300 461 486 500 92 168 530
Jordan 3,833 5,470 10,700 1,349 1,871 4,300 1,321 1,587 2,900
Louisville Township 1,359 1,266 1,200 410 425 430 476 298 300
New Market Township 3,057 3,440 3,300 956 1,146 1,200 262 325 500
New Prague (pt)3,157 4,280 7,200 1,160 1,618 3,100 2,282 2,142 3,270
Prior Lake 15,917 22,796 39,300 5,645 8,447 15,700 7,972 7,766 12,900
St. Lawrence Township 472 483 810 144 161 320 145 48 50
Sand Creek Township 1,551 1,521 1,400 478 554 560 249 298 460
Savage 21,115 26,911 38,200 6,807 9,116 14,300 5,366 6,753 9,500
Shakopee 20,568 37,076 57,400 7,540 12,772 21,500 13,938 18,831 31,900
Spring Lake Township 3,681 3,631 4,100 1,217 1,267 1,600 176 390 400
Scott County Total 89,498 129,928 201,900 30,692 45,108 77,800 34,931 41,534 67,930
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Afton 2,839 2,886 3,100 996 1,081 1,300 351 411 490
Bayport 3,162 3,471 4,400 763 855 1,300 4,900 3,790 5,100
Baytown Township 1,533 1,617 2,000 492 573 760 154 69 260
Birchwood Village 968 870 840 357 351 360 20 25 30
Cottage Grove 30,582 34,589 49,300 9,932 11,719 18,600 6,263 6,484 9,600
Dellwood 1,033 1,065 1,100 353 373 450 282 277 300
Denmark Township 1,348 1,737 2,500 481 615 1,000 386 629 650
Forest Lake 14,440 18,377 28,300 5,433 7,015 12,000 6,636 6,449 9,700
Grant 4,026 4,094 4,300 1,374 1,463 1,700 750 449 840
Grey Cloud Island Township 307 295 280 117 117 120 50 10 40
Hastings (pt)3 - - 2 - - 224 64 100
Hugo 6,363 13,332 32,500 2,125 4,990 13,600 1,917 1,973 4,000
Lake Elmo 6,863 8,061 20,500 2,347 2,776 8,000 1,682 1,941 3,160
Lakeland 1,917 1,796 1,500 691 681 710 374 302 470
Lakeland Shores 355 311 360 116 117 160 20 26 40
Lake St. Croix Beach 1,140 1,053 1,000 462 460 500 50 129 130
Landfall 700 663 770 292 257 300 50 25 30
Mahtomedi 7,563 7,676 7,700 2,503 2,827 3,100 1,252 2,090 2,660
Marine on St. Croix 602 689 1,000 254 302 450 235 124 160
May Township 2,928 2,776 3,800 1,007 1,083 1,600 40 66 180
Newport 3,715 3,435 4,600 1,418 1,354 2,100 2,480 1,605 2,000
Oakdale 26,653 27,401 31,000 10,243 10,956 13,000 7,812 8,651 15,000
Oak Park Heights 3,777 4,445 5,800 1,528 1,911 2,600 2,713 4,358 7,500
Pine Springs 421 408 370 140 144 150 10 72 80
St. Marys Point 344 366 330 132 147 150 10 15 20
St. Paul Park 5,070 5,273 7,900 1,829 1,967 3,300 1,399 1,515 2,520
Scandia 3,692 3,934 5,000 1,294 1,498 2,100 272 519 730
Stillwater 15,323 18,227 22,500 5,797 7,076 9,500 10,719 9,628 11,700
Stillwater Township 2,553 2,364 2,700 833 855 1,100 120 165 250
West Lakeland Township 3,547 4,054 4,000 1,101 1,286 1,500 313 232 370
White Bear Lake (pt)351 403 680 149 198 300 131 184 200
Willernie 549 507 480 225 218 230 135 182 200
Woodbury 46,463 61,961 87,200 16,676 22,594 33,100 15,899 19,438 28,700
Washington County Total 201,130 238,136 337,810 71,462 87,859 135,140 67,649 71,897 107,210
METRO AREA 2,642,062 2,849,567 3,673,860 1,021,456 1,117,749 1,509,190 1,606,263 1,543,872 2,102,090
1
1
A Growing and Changing Twin Cities Region: Regional Forecast to 2040 February 2014
Metropolitan Council Regional Policy and Research 390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805 metrocouncil.org
The Metropolitan Council forecasts
population, households and
employment, with a 30-year horizon,
for the seven-county Minneapolis-
St. Paul region. The Council
assesses the Twin Cities region’s
relative economic competitiveness
and projects future population and
employment using a regional
economic model, REMI PI.
The Council locates regional
forecasts to specific cities and
townships through additional
modeling. The Council’s land use
model projects the likely geographic
pattern of future growth, given real
estate and location choice
dynamics, regional policies and
local land use controls.
The regional forecast, together with
local forecasts, will be incorporated
into the Thrive MSP 2040 regional
plan, scheduled for Council
adoption in May 2014.
Consistent with Minnesota Statutes
473.146 and 473.859, the regional
and local forecasts provide a shared
foundation for coordinated,
comprehensive planning by the
Council and local governments.
See About the Forecasts on p. 5.
For more information, contact:
Todd Graham
Principal Forecaster
todd.graham@metc.state.mn.us
651-602-1322
The Metropolitan Council’s forecast anticipates continued
growth and increased diversity for the seven-county
Minneapolis-St Paul region. The region’s population is
projected to grow by 824,000 in coming decades. By 2040,
people of color will comprise 40 percent of the region; senior
citizens, 21 percent.
Metropolitan Council Regional Forecast to 2040
2010
Population 2,850,000
2020
3,102,000
2030
3,381,000
2040
3,674,000
Households 1,118,000 1,257,000 1,388,000 1,509,000
Employment 1,548,000
1,819,000 1,953,000 2,097,000
The seven-county Minneapolis-St. Paul region is projected to gain
824,000 people in coming decades, reaching 3,674,000 residents in
2040, up from 2,850,000 in 2010. Projected growth rates, 9 percent per
decade, are below peak growth rates seen in the 1980s and the 1990s –
but above-average compared to national projections for the same period.
Natural population growth, or births outpacing deaths, will add 590,000
residents. Natural population growth will account for 72 percent of the
total population growth from 2010 to 2040. Birth rates are higher among
families of color than white families, contributing steadily and gradually to
the racial and ethnic diversity of the region.
More than one-quarter (28 percent) of the region’s population gain will be
driven by migration. The Twin Cities region is likely to gain 355,000 new
residents through international immigration while losing 128,000
residents to domestic out-migration, for a net migration gain of 227,000
during the 30-years forecast period.
The Twin Cities region will continue to be an immigration gateway
throughout the 30-year period, and immigration will substantially
accelerate the region’s diversity trend. Of the expected international
immigrants, 85 percent will be people of color, from all continents; 15
percent will be white, non-Latino, mainly from Europe and Canada.
2 2
Net domestic migration – the flow of
movers between the Twin Cities region
and the rest of the nation – amounts to
a net loss of 128,000 residents during
2010-40. This is not a new trend. US
Census data shows emigrants leaving
the region have outnumbered new
domestic arrivals throughout the past
decade.
This net loss is directly related to
economic conditions: The regional
economy did not gain employment
during the decade ending in 2010. An
improving economy will steer this trend
over time. Domestic migration will
respond to new workforce demand.
Still, geographic situation and perception of the Twin Cities region are challenges to attracting new residents. While
employment and business opportunities draw in workers and students, the region loses people who have priorities
beyond work and school. For example, many long-time residents have family or sentimental connections with
Greater Minnesota; much of the Twin Cities’ domestic migration deficit is due to returns or relocations to the rest of
the state.
Immigration and natural population
growth together will replenish the Twin
Cities region’s school enrollments and
workforce. The region’s under-25
population will grow 18 percent, from
965,000 in 2010 to 1,143,000 in 2040.
This will partly offset the protracted
retirement boom that is expected to
last for the next 20 years.
While every age cohort will grow,
none will grow as fast as the senior
citizens population. Twin Cities
region’s senior population will double
between 2010 and 2030, and will
continue to grow throughout the
projections period, from 307,000
seniors in 2010 to 781,000 in 2040. Between the aging of baby boomers and longer life expectancies, senior
citizens will become a substantial market segment. In 2010, senior citizens were 11 percent of the region’s
population; in 2040, seniors will be 21 percent of the population.
-132,000 -70,000 -39,000
-19,000
108,000 95,000 122,000 138,000
231,000 221,000 195,000 174,000
2001-2010 2011-2020 2021-2030 2031-2040
Components of Population Growth, 2000-2040
Natural Growth
International Migrants
Domestic Migrants
581,000 594,000 623,000 686,000
384,000 410,000 433,000 457,000
1,579,000 1,624,000 1,644,000 1,750,000
307,000 475,000 681,000
781,000
2010 2020 2030 2040
Population by Age, 2010-2040
Ages 65+
Ages 25-64
Ages 15-24
Ages 0-14
A Growing and Changing Twin Cities Region: Regional Forecast to 2040
Metropolitan Council Regional Policy and Research 390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805 metrocouncil.org
3 3
As the region’s age profile
changes, its households mix
also changes: The senior
citizens population will more
than double by 2030; so too
will the number of senior-
headed households.
With seniors making
decisions for 32 percent of
region’s households in 2040,
their needs and preferences
will become a predominant
driver of the housing market.
Twin Cities region’s seniors
are mostly long-time
residents, and mostly have
lived in single-family
detached housing. Some may choose to “age in place.” But almost half of senior-headed households are people
living alone. Many seniors living alone, and senior couples, will choose to move, opting for attached housing,
apartments, and age-restricted housing options. As they move, the turnover of single-family detached houses will
balloon, offsetting the need for greater supply of single-family detached housing.
The Council forecasts 1,509,000 households in 2040, up 35 percent from the 1,118,000 households counted by
Census 2010. The overall gains, and the net additional housing implied, are in line with historical trends. But the
balance of market demand will be very different from recent history. The number of senior-headed households will
grow by 200,000, driven upward by the aging and longevity of baby boomers. As baby boomers leave the ranks of
family-age or working-age households, those market segments will grow at much reduced rates. The number of
family-age or working-age households with 2 or more people will grow by only 67,000 – just 17 percent of expected
households growth.
Between the churn of migration and higher birth rates among Latino, black, and Asian populations, the Twin Cities
region will become more racially and ethnically diverse. In 2010, people of color comprised 24 percent of the
regional population. By 2040, people of color will be 40 percent of the region. And the workforce of 2040 will reflect
the diversity seen today in the region’s elementary schools.
The population of color will more than double during the forecast period, from 676,000 in 2010 to 1,486,000 in
2040, while the white population will peak and level off at its current level. Among people of color, each racial or
ethnic group is forecast to more than double. The Latino population will increase from 168,000 in 2010 to 373,000
in 2040. The black population will increase from 234,000 in 2010 to 515,000 in 2040. And the population of Asians
and other people of color will increase from 274,000 in 2010 to 598,000 in 2040.
A Growing and Changing Twin Cities Region: Regional Forecast to 2040
229,000 242,000 239,000 253,000
280,000 296,000 286,000 300,000
418,000 420,000 433,000 465,000
90,000 137,000 198,000 241,000 100,000
162,000
231,000
250,000
2010 2020 2030 2040
Households by Type, 2010-2040
Age 65+: 2+ person household
Age 65+: 1 person household
Under 65: 3+ person household
Under 65: 2 person household
Under 65: 1 person household
Metropolitan Council Regional Policy and Research 390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805 metrocouncil.org
4 4
The Council’s population forecasts
reveal contrasting trends in the age
distributions of white residents and
people of color. This will have
significant implications for the future
workforce of the region.
The number of white residents, ages
25-64, will shrink by 19 percent, from
1,262,000 in 2010 to 1,020,000 in
2040. Concurrently, the working-age
population of color will more than
double, from 317,000 in 2010 to
730,000 in 2040. Within the workforce,
diversity will grow. By 2040, people of
color will comprise 42 percent of
working-age residents.
A Growing and Changing Twin Cities Region: Regional Forecast to 2040
Metropolitan Council Regional Policy and Research 390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805 metrocouncil.org
Similarly, the Council projects an increasingly diverse student body in the region. The population of color under age
25 will grow by 180 percent, from 335,000 in 2010 to 601,000 in 2040. In contrast, the number of white residents
under age 25 will fall from 630,000 in 2010 to 543,000 in 2040, pulling down the share of whites among school-age
children and young adults.
Migration is the major factor driving this demographic transition. People moving from the Twin Cities region to other
parts of Minnesota or the nation are mostly white and older (retirees). In contrast, the region’s gain of international
immigrants is predominantly people of color, mostly people in their 20s, and often immigrating with children.
2,174,000 2,210,000 2,212,000 2,188,000
234,000 309,000 402,000 515,000 274,000 364,000 476,000 598,000
168,000
219,000
291,000
373,000
2010 2020 2030 2040
Population by Race and Ethnicity, 2010-2040
Latino
Asian and Other
Black or African
American
White
366,000 343,000 318,000 314,000 216,000 251,000 304,000 372,000
264,000 258,000 242,000 229,000 119,000 152,000 191,000 229,000
1,262,000 1,186,000 1,065,000 1,020,000
317,000 437,000
578,000
730,000
282,000 424,000 586,000 625,000
25,000
51,000
96,000
157,000
2010
White
2020
White
2030
White
2040
White
2010
People of
Color
2020
People of
Color
2030
People of
Color
2040
People of
Color
Population by Race / Ethnicity and Age
Ages 65+
Ages 25-64
Ages 15-24
Ages 0-14
5 5
The Council forecasts employment growth of 549,000 jobs, up from 1,548,000 in 2010 to 2,097,000 in 2040.
Employment will grow rapidly in the short-term (18 percent growth in the 2010s) and at a slower pace (7 percent
growth) in the 2020s and 2030s. This growth compares to a net employment loss during the 2000s, and previous
gains of 34 percent in the 1970s, 22 percent in the 1980s, and 26 percent in the 1990s.
779,000
1,040,000
1,273,000
1,608,000 1,548,000
1,819,000 1,953,000 2,097,000
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
Historic and Forecasted Employment
A Growing and Changing Twin Cities Region: Regional Forecast to 2040
The region’s Gross Metro Product, the sum of value added by all industry sectors, will rise to $409 billion in 2040 –
equivalent to 1.5 percent of the US Gross Domestic Product. For context, the Twin Cities region has less than 1.0
percent of the nation’s population.
Employment opportunities in the Twin Cities region attract not only new migrants, but also commuting workers
living in Greater Minnesota or Wisconsin. In 2010, the Council estimates that 6.8 percent of earnings at Twin Cities
workplaces are earned by external commuters. (This is offset by 1.3 percent of residents’ earnings coming from
work in Greater Minnesota, Wisconsin, or elsewhere.) This balance of long-distance commuters, and earnings
returning with to their places of residence, will persist long-term, as the Twin Cities region remains the predominant
economic center for Minnesota and western Wisconsin.
About the Council’s Forecasts
To prepare its long-range forecast, the Metropolitan Council uses REMI PI, a regional economic model. The REMI
PI model utilizes computable general equilibrium and new economic geography techniques to project forward time-
series of economic and demographic outcomes. The REMI PI projections are informed by data on the region’s
industry mix, costs and productivity, and analysis of regional competitiveness within the national economy.
Employment, migration, and population outcomes directly flow from projected economic performance.
To obtain household counts, the REMI PI population projection is parsed into household types using race-specific,
age-specific household formation rates from analysis of Census data.
Metropolitan Council Regional Policy and Research 390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805 metrocouncil.org
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 1/13/14
AGENDA ITEM: 5A – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2014-01
ITEM: Friedrich Property Comprehensive Plan Amendment
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission has been directed by the City Council to conduct a public hearing to
consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that would revise the future land use map for property at
9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. The Council has specifically asked that the Planning Commission
consider changing the future land use designation of this property from RAD-ALT (Rural Area
Development Alternate Density) to RAD (Rural Area Development). The primary difference
between these two land use categories is that the RAD-ALT designation would allow residential
densities on the site of up to 2.0 units per acre while the RAD designation would limit this number to
0.45 units per acre.
Because the Planning Commission has spent a significant amount of time over the last two months
reviewing and discussing the City’s rural development areas in a fair amount of detail, Staff will be
providing a more basic summary of the City’s past action on this property within the present report
and will ask that the Commission refer to the previous meeting packets for additional information
concerning the history and current issues associated with the rural development areas in the
community.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City Council initiated action
Property Owners: Irvin Friedrich, 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North
Location: 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North (part of Section 15 Township 029 Range 021).
PID Number 15.029.21.31.0001
Request: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of the
subject property from RAD-ALT to RAD
Existing Land Use: Single Family Residential/Agricultural/Agricultural Outbuildings
Existing Zoning: RR – Rural Residential
Surrounding Land Use: Single Family Residential, Agricultural, Park
Surrounding Zoning: RS – Rural Single Family; RR – Rural Residential; A – Agriculture
Comprehensive Plan: RAD-ALT (Rural Agricultural Density Alternate Density); 2.0 units per
acre
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – PUBLIC HEARING
2
Proposed Comp Plan: RAD (Rural Agricultural Density); 0.45 units per acre
History: The subject property has been used as an agricultural farmstead for decades. The
future land use designation for the property was changed in 2010 in response to a
request for a senior living/farm school development proposal that has since been
rendered void due to the passing of City submittal deadlines for further review.
There are no active development proposals pending on the property. Upon receipt of
a Planning Commission recommendation to establish a moratorium on all RAD-ALT
properties, the City Council did not adopt such a moratorium and instead directed the
Commission to consider a land use change to the subject property.
Deadline for Action: None
Applicable Regulations: Comprehensive Plan – Chapter III: Land Use Plan
Zoning Ordinance – Article 9: Rural District Standards
Section 154.067 – OP2 Zoning Regulations
REQUEST DETAILS
The Planning Commission has devoted time at two of its recent meetings to discuss the City’s rural
development areas, and has asked that these conversations continue as part of the Commission’s
work plan for 2014. The Commission will specifically be looking at potential changes to the
Comprehensive Plan that will study the following issues:
• Potential population and household forecast reductions associated with the Met Council’s
revised 2040 regional forecasts.
• Elimination of the RAD-ALT future land use category.
• Amendments to the rural development areas that will allow for additional development
opportunities on parcels less than 40 acres in size.
• Consideration of the benefits and drawbacks of allowing additional development in rural
areas in terms of public service costs, impacts on rural character, and other factors.
In anticipation of potential changes to the City’s Comprehensive Plan related to the above
discussions, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt a moratorium on all
RAD-ALT development for a period of nine months. This time period was chosen to allow time for
the 2040 Regional Forecast (and related projections for cities within the metro area) to be finalized
before the City made any long-term decisions concerning the population and household numbers
used in the land use plan. The City Council ultimately did not support the recommended moratorium
concerning RAD-ALT development, but did ask the Planning Commission to consider a more
immediate change on one of the City’s properties that is guided in this manner.
The specific request from the City Council was that the Commission consider a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to change the future land use designation of the property at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard
North from RAD-ALT to RAD. The Council’s rationale for choosing only this parcel for a change
includes the following:
• The City created the RAD-ALT (which was initially called RAD-2) land use category as
part of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan amendment after an extensive study and review of
the City’s obligations under the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and
Met Council.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – PUBLIC HEARING
3
• Based on an analysis of these obligations, it was decided that the City would need to
increase densities in the rural development areas in order to achieve the household and
population requirements by 2030.
• The sites chosen for the increased density (RAD-2 land use classification) were selected
for specific reasons, including proximately to sewered development, isolation from other
rural parcels, and locations along municipal boundaries or adjacent sewered communities.
• The land use designation for the subject parcel at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard was changed
based on a specific development proposal that has not materialized and is no longer valid.
Under state statutes, the City Council cannot take action to amend the Comprehensive Plan without a
recommendation from the Planning Commission and until after a public hearing has been conducted
as part of the Commission’s review. The Commission is therefore being asked to conduct this public
hearing at its next meeting to gather additional feedback on this matter and to make a formal
recommendation to the City Council concerning the appropriate land use designation for the subject
property.
BACKGROUND/PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES
The City received a land use application from Tammy Malmquist, 8549 Ironwood Trail in the spring
of 2010 to change the future land use designation of the Friedrich property at 9434 Stillwater
Boulevard North from RAD to RAD-2 (which is the same as the current RAD-ALT land use
category). This application was made in order to allow a concurrent request for a senior living,
townhouse, and farm-based preschool Planned Unit Development project to move forward. The
applicant further requested an amendment to the City’s zoning regulation in order to create new OP-2
Open Space Preservation Zoning regulations that was also drafted in order support the proposed
development.
In the period of time since the Comprehensive Plan amendment for the subject property was
approved, the project applicant has not submitted a preliminary development plan and the timeframe
for submitting such a plan has expired. There is therefore no pending application moving forward on
this property, and any previous or new request for development would need to go back through a
concept plan review (with a new application, hearing, etc.).
In order to aid the Planning Commission’s deliberation on the current Comprehensive Plan
Amendment under review, Staff has attached the previous Staff Report that was prepared for the City
Council when the 2010 request was initially reviewed by the City. Although over three years has
passed since this review was conducted by the City, the information specific to the Comprehensive
Plan and the applicant’s site is still relevant and should be useful for the Planning Commission to
consider with the present request. Please note the following important points from this report:
• The City split up its review of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and project development
(PUD) applications and dealt with these matters at separate meetings.
• Planning Staff recommended denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for reasons that
are spelled out in greater detail in the report.
• The Planning Commission unanimously (all nine members at the time) recommended
approval of the request to the City Council.
• The City Council, after several meetings and a workshop session, voted 4-1 to approve the
Comprehensive Plan amendment.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – PUBLIC HEARING
4
Since 2010, the City has adopted two major amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and adopted a
new future land use map for the entire community. There were no changes made, however, to any of
the land uses outside of the Village Planning Area and I-94 Corridor Planning Area with the
exception of minor corrections and adjustments to fir the new map.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Because this matter is being directed to the Planning Commission from the City Council, Staff will
not be presenting a formal recommendation to the Commission other than to review the findings that
have been previously proposed or adopted. The Commission should consider its recent discussions
concerning rural area development as part of its review, and Staff would be happy to make any of
these past reports available to individual Commissioners (these reports are also available on the
City’s website).
Staff would like to suggest the following parameters as the Commission deliberates on the present
request:
1. The Planning Commission has been asked to consider a specific Comprehensive Plan
Amendment for a specific property in the community.
2. A public hearing notice has been mailed to all properties within 350 feet of the subject parcel
and this hearing has been scheduled for January 13, 2014.
3. Comments and discussion concerning a specific development are not appropriate and are
irrelevant to the Council’s specific request.
4. Discussion and comments concerning general land uses are appropriate, especially those that
relate to uses and densities allowed under the RAD-ALT land use designation.
5. The zoning that correlates to the RAD-ALT category (OP-2 zoning regulations) allows senior
living multi-family buildings, townhouses, and single family residential structures at a
density of up to 2 dwelling units per acre. The RAD category and corresponding OP zoning
allow single family homes and a very limited number of townhouses at a density of 0.45 units
per acre (18 houses per 40 acres).
6. The Council is seeking public feedback on the proposed change and will be considering this
feedback along with the Planning Commission’s recommendation prior to taking action on
the proposed amendment.
Using the previous staff recommendation and City Council action as a guide, the Planning
Commission should consider the following potential findings as the basis for a recommendation to
the City Council. All of these findings are based on the information that was presented or drafted
during the 2010 City reviews:
Findings that Support No Change to the Comprehensive Plan (Leave Subject Property as RAD):
1) The current use of this site as a working farm is unique compared to other properties
designated for RAD development in the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The proposed amendment will help provide opportunities for senior housing within the
community.
3) Recent subdivisions in areas guided for RAD development have been approved at a density
below the unit levels anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed density increase
will be offset by reductions that have previously been approved or acknowledged by the City.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – PUBLIC HEARING
5
4) The subject site is located in close proximity to public transportation along State Highway 5,
and specifically, a bus route that could provide alternate transportation options for a
residential development.
5) The applicant’s site is located immediately adjacent to existing R-1 Single Family Residential
zoning districts along its southern, eastern, and western boundaries. Other areas guided for
RAD development are primarily surrounded by rural residential, agricultural, or public open
space uses.
Findings that Support a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Change Subject Property from RAD-ALT
to RAD):
1) There have been no changes in circumstances since the Land Use Section of the
Comprehensive Plan was updated in 2006 that warrant revisions to increase or transfer
density to the subject site.
2) Higher density residential development is encouraged in areas that will be served by public
sanitary sewer where the provision of these services is more cost-effective and where the City
will receive credit towards the REC unit counts mandated under its Memorandum of
Understanding with the Metropolitan Council.
3) The Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan specifically states that any future senior-
specific housing in Lake Elmo will be best accommodated within the Old Village Area due to
proximity to goods, services, and public facilities.
4) The subject site does not demonstrate any characteristics that are substantially different from
other areas guided for RAD development in the City of Lake Elmo or that would indicate that
higher density development is more appropriate in this area than any other site within the
City.
5) The City is has recently adopted major Comprehensive Plan amendment related to
development in the Old Village Area and the I-94 corridor. Given the current market
conditions, the City encourages higher density development in areas that would help off-set
the significant infrastructure costs required to serve these areas.
6) Higher density housing is not consistent with the City’s stated goals to preserve and enhance
its rural character, especially when planned in areas that are guided for Rural Agricultural
Density.
7) Build-out of existing empty lots in platted and developed OP developments is encouraged
over the creation of new development and service areas in the community
8) New access that would be needed to support development on the subject site does not
conform to the City’s Transportation Plan that encourages limited access to major collector
roads and is inconsistent with the City’s access spacing guidelines.
DRAFT FINDINGS
Please refer to the comments in the previous section.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – PUBLIC HEARING
6
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission review the materials present above, attached to
this report, and previously considered by the Commission during its deliberations regarding the
City’s rural development areas and make a recommendation to the City Council to either:
a) approve an amendment to the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan to change the future land
use designation of property at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD-ALT to RAD
based on the “Findings that Support a Comprehensive Plan Amendment” as presented
above or as otherwise modified by the Planning Commission; or
b) make no changes to the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan based on the “Findings that
Support No Change to the Comprehensive Plan” as presented above or as otherwise
modified by the Planning Commission.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report – 5/4/10 City Council Meeting
2. Location Map
3. Proposed Map Amendment
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ....................................................... Community Development Director
- Report by Staff .................................................. Community Development Director
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Public Hearing Comments ............................................................................... Chair
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 11/13/13
AGENDA ITEM: 5A – BUSINESS ITEM
CASE # 2013-036
ITEM: Rural Area Development Analysis and Discussion – Further Review
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to continue its discussion from its October 28, 2013
meeting concerning the City’s rural development areas. The Commission is specifically asked to
further review the RAD-ALT land use category and to conduct an analysis of the potential to expand
the use of Residential Estates zoning in the future. Staff is therefore seeking a recommendation from
the Commission on the following:
1. Whether or not to continue guiding areas in the RAD-ALT land use category as part of the
City’s Future Land Use Map; and
2. Whether or not the City should pursue Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments that
would either expand the use of the Residential Estates land use category or revise the rural
development standards in some other manner in order to allow additional development
opportunities on parcels less than 40 acres.
The first inquiry may be acted upon with an amendment to the City’s Future Land Use Map in the
Comprehensive Plan while the latter issue will require further review and discussion by the Planning
Commission should the Commission want to pursue such changes.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City-initiated action for discussion
Request: Continue previous review and discussion of land use plans and policies
concerning Rural Development Areas
History: The City revised its Comprehensive Plan for rural areas in the early-mid 1990’s
to allow for open space developments. The amendments from this time period
limited the use of the Residential Estates as a future land use and instead
encouraged any future development of land to be consistent with the City’s open
space regulations. The RAD-2 category was added to the Plan in 2005 in
response to Met Council growth directives.
Deadline for Action: None
Applicable Regulations: Comprehensive Plan – Chapter III: Land Use Plan
Zoning Ordinance – Article 9: Rural District Standards
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – BUSINESS ITEM
2
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
After considering the history of the City’s rural development areas and reviewing recent population
projections with Staff, the Planning Commission is being asked to further discuss two aspects of this
discussion from its October 28, 2013 meeting as described above. Rather than repeating the
information presented at the last meeting, Staff has attached the previous Staff report for further
review and discussion by the Commission. The two questions that are now being carried forward for
further discussion include the future application of the RAD-ALT land use category and the potential
for additional development opportunities within smaller parcels in the City’s rural areas.
RAD-ALT LAND USE CATEGORY
The City of Lake Elmo currently guides 157 acres in the RAD-ALT land use category, which
corresponds to roughly 314 units of housing. The three areas that have been assigned this
designation include the following parcels:
PIN Owner Area (acres)
16.029.21.24.0002 3M Company 96
15.029.21.31.0001 Irvin Friedrich 24
25.029.21.44.0001 Terry Emerson 37
The 3M and Emerson properties were changed to the RAD-ALT category as part of the 2005
Comprehensive Plan amendment, while the Friedrich parcel was changed to this category as part of a
stand-alone amendment approved by the City in 2010. There were no corresponding reductions or
revisions elsewhere in the code with the 2010 amendment, and at that time, the City found that the
affected area was small enough that it would not significantly alter any of City’s household
projections. The Council has previously discussed the idea of implementing a development rights
transfer program in order to allow transfers of density between RAD and RAD-ALT development
sites, but has not taken any action since 2010 to create such a program.
As the Planning Commission considers the future status of the RAD-ALT land use category, Staff
would like to point out the following:
• To date, there have been no developments approved in the City’s RAD-ALT areas, and only
one proposal for RAD-ALT development has been brought forward at a conceptual level.
• The concept plan noted above was for a 52-unit senior living and farm-based preschool
proposal that is no longer a valid development application. The time limit for the submission
of a preliminary plan for the site has expired. No new development plans for this property
have come forward, although the former applicant has approached Staff recently to discuss an
alterative concept plan.
• The Friedrich family does not support any changes to the future land use for their property
that would lower the current density of the site.
• As part of its discussions with the Met Council concerning the recently released preliminary
population and household forecasts for Lake Elmo, the City will be seeking reductions in
these numbers when the forecast is finalized. As presented in Staff’s previous report to the
City Council, the proposed reductions would allow the City to lower the number of
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – BUSINESS ITEM
3
households that are expected in rural development areas. Should the Met Council accept
these numbers, the RAD-ALT category would not be needed to meet the old forecasts. The
City may decide to keep this land use classification for other reasons (i.e. to encourage a
wider mix of uses in rural development areas).
During previous discussions concerning the RAD-ALT district and based on the City’s review of
previous open space projects, the following questions and concerns have been raised
• The RAD-ALT category allows for 2 units of housing per acre, which is a density that is
much closer to an urban or suburban form of development than a rural type of development.
For comparison purposes, the single family areas within the future Lennar development are
slightly under 3 units per acre on a net density basis, while the Carriage Station subdivision
was platted to meet a density of 2 units per acre.
• The use of well and septic systems in RAD-ALT areas presents challenges for developers
because there is so little area to work with once the homes, roads, and other infrastructure is
taken into consideration. While more homes mean a more reasonable allocation of costs for
shared systems, more users also require a much larger and more costly system as well.
• The Planning Commission has previously discussed the potential to serve RAD-ALT areas
with public sanitary sewer. Given the relatively small differences in density between RAD-
ALT and the low density urban areas, it might be better to simply guide these sites for
sewered residential densities if the City wants to support more development outside of the
existing sewer service area boundaries.
• Some of the areas that are guided for RAD-ALT development are located adjacent to general
RAD areas or other existing lower density residential neighborhoods. The compatibility
between these areas has been a concern for the neighbors surrounding the Friedrich property.
• There is also the question of whether or not it is truly feasible to develop a project under the
RAD-ALT ordinance given the current requirement to preserve half of a site as open space.
Acknowledging the downturn in the economy that has affected the housing market since the
late 2000’s, there have been no RAD-ALT projects approved by the City (and only one that
even made it to a concept stage) in the last eight years.
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission further review and discuss the City’s RAD-
ALT land use classification at its next meeting and provide direction to Staff should any the
Comprehensive Plan changes be deemed necessary by the Commission. The options that should be
considered by the City include the following:
1) Eliminate the RAD-ALT land use category from the Comprehensive Plan and change all
areas presently guided in this manner to RAD.
2) Eliminate some of the RAD-ALT areas and leave only those areas as RAD-ALT that the
Planning Commission believes should be guided in this manner.
3) Wait to make any changes to the RAD and RAD-ALT land use classifications until after the
Met Council has finalized the City’s 2014 forecast. This action is expected to occur
sometime in the spring of 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – BUSINESS ITEM
4
4) Do not take any action at this time to make changes to the Comprehensive Plan.
5) Expand the areas that are guided for RAD-ALT in the Comprehensive Plan or move the
current areas guided for such density to other parcels.
6) Consider revisions to the RAD-ALT land use in order to address concerns regarding
compatibility between uses.
7) Consider other revisions to the RAD-ALT land use to either expand the uses allowed within
these areas or to further revise the regulations to promote certain types of activities (i.e. to
allow certain types of housing or only low traffic-generating activities).
Of these options, Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission follow number (3) and take
this issue up as part of a broader Comprehensive Plan discussion once the 2014 forecast is finalized.
In the meantime, the Commission should be aware that taking this course of action would allow
developments to come forward under the present guidelines, but any such projects would be subject
to new public hearings and would require review by the Planning Commission. Staff does not
recommend a moratorium on RAD-ALT development because the MOU between the City and Met
Council is still in effect. The City should continue to work towards implementation of the current
plan as long as the MOU remains in effect.
GENERAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
One of the Commission’s discussion items from the last meeting also included the City’s rural
development areas in general, and in particular, how to best plan for the future use of parcels that are
under 40 acres in size. The City’s current open space ordinance allows for OP developments on
parcels that are 40 acres or more in size, but would only allow such development on smaller parcels
through an exception process. In practice there have only been a few OP developments that have
been created on properties with less than 40 acres. Under current zoning regulations, parcels that are
less than 40 acres and zoned RR – Rural Residential could be split into lots no smaller than 10 acres,
while parcels zoned A – Agriculture could not be further subdivided.
The Commission may also want to further discuss the RED (Residential Estates) land use category to
assess whether or not this land use could be expanded into new areas in order to provide alternative
development options on smaller parcels. At present, the City’s Comprehensive Plan does not
identify any new areas for RED development outside of existing developments or areas that were
planned for such land use prior to the 2005 land use plan. The Staff comments below concerning
residential development on smaller rural parcels take into account an expansion of the RED
classification.
In order to provide the Planning Commission with a better perspective on the remaining undeveloped
land in the City’s rural development areas, Staff will be bringing a report with a summary of the lot
sizes in these areas for discussion at the meeting.
Some facts that should be considered by the Commission as it discusses this item include the
following:
• There have been around 20 OP developments approved and constructed over the past 20
years in Lake Elmo. Some of these developments have been recognized nationally for best
practices in conservation-based subdivisions.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – BUSINESS ITEM
5
• There have been no new OP developments approved by the City within since 2007. This is
due partly to the downturn in the economy.
• At present, there are roughly 40-50 vacant lots available within OP developments. This
number continues to drop by 20-30 lots each year, meaning the current supply of OP lots will
last no more than 2 years without additional subdivisions coming forward.
• The City has seen several large lot subdivision created in the last several years (10 acre lots)
that have removed land from potential development under OP regulations.
• Staff has observed a fairly healthy market for lots within RS – Rural Single Family areas, and
periodically older, existing homes are razed to make way for new, larger structures within
these areas. The significant number of lake-frontage lots in the Tri-Lakes area will continue
to be a factor in the demand for redevelopment of existing lots.
• The City has made recent agreements to extend public sewer service into a small rural single
family area on the west side of Lake Olson and has agreed to extend sewer into at least one
open space development outside of the Village. Staff expects pressure to provide sewer
service to the Tri-Lakes area and to open space developments that are located close to the
urban service areas will be one of the more important land use decisions that should be
addressed in the next major Comprehensive Plan update.
• The City has rejected proposals in the past to split land in RAD areas into parcels less than 10
acres. Staff has found that it is very difficult for potential applicants to meet all of the City’s
variance criterion for these types of and use applications.
Should the Planning Commission and City Council decide to pursue changes to the minimum lot
sizes allowed in rural development areas or to expand the use of the Residential Estates land use to
new developments, Staff would like to offer the following as general comments:
• Maintaining an adequate amount of road frontage for every platted lot will be very
problematic for most parcels that are less than 40 acres in size. The City does allow one
parcel to be split without road frontage in rural development areas, but this often leads to
situations in which a driveway is either shared by two parties or a driveway easement crosses
someone else’s land. This type of situation may be acceptable when there are over 20 acres
to work with, but could become problematic on smaller lots.
• The cost of servicing developments with lots that are larger than ¼ to ½ of an acre in size is
much higher than in developments with smaller and/or clustered lots. Even in situations in
which sewer and water are installed on an each individual lot, the City must still provide
roads, storm water improvements, fire protection, and other services that are now spread
across a greater area.
• As lots become smaller, it is more difficult to find suitable area for adequate on-site septic
systems. Smaller lots also provide less land that could be used to address failing systems.
• The platting of lots less than 10 acres in size would eliminate large areas of open space that
are protected by the current minimum lot area requirements. One of the foremost goals in the
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – BUSINESS ITEM
6
City Comprehensive Plan is the preservation and open space and rural character. The
platting of lots of less than ten acres in size may not help the City achieve these objectives.
• Further subdivision of lots in rural areas into parcels of 2 to 5 acres in size would create an
environment in these areas that is much more suburban than rural in character. With
additional homes the City can expect to see additional traffic, more buildings, fewer
agricultural parcels, and less vegetation than presently exists in these areas.
Because the Planning Commission has only recently completed its work on major Comprehensive
Plan amendments for the City’s future sewer service areas, the Commission may want to consider
looking at options for updating the Comprehensive Plan and ordinances concerning rural
development areas. Staff would recommend that any such work, if the Planning Commission finds
that the City should study this issue further, be considered as part of the work plan for 2014.
To help the Planning Commission with its discussion on this topic, Staff has developed the following
options that could be considered for further study:
1) Revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow OP developments on parcels of less than 40 acres in
size. At one time the minimum lot size for an OP project was 20 acres; however, this
provision was changed in order to encourage the preservation of larger open space areas
throughout the City. The previous Staff analysis that was shared with the Planning
Commission noted that this course of action would be needed in order to meet the City’s
2030 growth forecasts. A revised 2040 forecast would greatly reduce the need to change the
current OP ordinance minimum lot area requirement.
2) Change the minimum lot areas requirements in the City’s A and RR zoning districts to allow
smaller parcels to be created in these areas. For example, the City could reduce the minimum
lot area in RR zones to 5 acres and A zones to 20 acres. A change in the minimum lot area
may require the City to reconsider how it manages road frontage and lot ratio requirements in
these zoning districts.
3) Expand the use of the Residential Estates classification to areas that are not currently guided
for this type of density. Consistent with the Staff comments above, the City’s RED
developments have a much different look and feel than the City’s OP developments, even
though the OP developments allow for more homes. The Planning Commission should take
this into consideration if it would like to pursue this type of land use change.
4) Create a new land use category that would allow for limited development of parcels less than
40 acres in size while still adhering to the basic principles for an open space development. A
new land use category could potentially allow for clustering of development on smaller lots
provided the undeveloped portions of a site are either protected or retained under common
ownership. Staff suggests that a new category should only be created if it can meet certain
expectations, for instance, allowing for efficient delivery of public services, preserving open
spaces, maintaining the City’s rural character, providing environmental protection, reducing
storm water impacts, etc. Staff is planning on doing some additional research into how a new
land use category could be created prior to the Planning Commission meeting and will share
some additional information with the Commission on this concept at the meeting.
5) Other options or alternatives as recommended by the Planning Commission.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – BUSINESS ITEM
7
Because any of the options noted above will require a fair amount of time and effort to implement,
Staff is recommending that the Commission conduct a general review of these options at the meeting
and give Staff some general direction as to one or more specific options that are chosen for further
study and analysis. At this time, Staff does not have a specific recommendation for action on any of
these alternatives.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission review the RAD-ALT options as listed in the
above report, but that the Commission not take any action to amend the City’s Comprehensive Plan
for the rural development areas (including RAD and RAD-ALT land use classifications) until after
the Met Council 2014 regional forecast is finalizes.
Staff further recommends that the Commission provide Staff with direction on which, if any, of the
general rural development options should be pursued in the future.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report – 10/28/13 Planning Commission Meeting
2. Rural Zoning District Standards
3. OP Zoning Regulations
4. OP-2 Zoning Regulations
5. Lake Elmo Future Land Use Map (Map 3-3)
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ....................................................... Community Development Director
- Report by Staff .................................................. Community Development Director
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Public Comments ............................................................................................. Chair
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a – BUSINESS ITEM
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 10/28/13
AGENDA ITEM: 5B – BUSINESS ITEM
CASE # 2013-036
ITEM: Rural Area Development Analysis and Discussion
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to conduct a review of the City’s rural development areas
as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. This matter is being brought before the Planning Commission
at the request of the City Council, which generally discussed the City’s rural development areas as
part of its retreat earlier this year. The Commission has also requested a broader discussion on this
topic in response to its own recent conversations concerning growth and development in these areas.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City-initiated action for discussion
Request: Review land use plans and policies concerning Rural Development Areas
History: The City revised its Comprehensive Plan for rural areas in the early-mid 1990’s
to allow for open space developments. The amendments from this time period
limited the use of the Residential Estates as a future land use and instead
encouraged any future development of land to be consistent with the City’s open
space regulations. The RAD-2 category was added to the Plan in 2005 in
response to Met Council growth directives.
Deadline for Action: None
Applicable Regulations: Comprehensive Plan – Chapter III: Land Use Plan
Zoning Ordinance – Article 9: Rural District Standards
REVIEW DETAILS
For the purposes of this review, Staff is suggesting that the Planning Commission’s review of the
City’s rural development areas focus on the following issues:
• The current plan for rural development areas and the history behind the development of this
plan.
• The most recent projections for growth and development for the rural portions of the
community.
• The application of the RAD and RAD-ALT (formerly RAD-2) land use designation, and
whether or not the City should make any changes to these categories.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
2
Earlier this year the City Council adopted two significant updates to the City’s Comprehensive Plan
that incorporated new land use plans for the Village and I-94 Corridor planning areas into the
document. While the focus of these updates was on the future sewer service areas, all of the existing
land use categories for the rural development areas were carried forward into the new Plan. A review
of the rural development areas is therefore a worthwhile exercise at this time since these the future
land use guidance for these areas has been left relatively unchanged since the last major
Comprehensive Plan amendment in 2005.
The City Council has also recently drafted a response to the preliminary 2040 Met Council forecast
for Lake Elmo that, if accepted, would reduce the City’s projections for population and household
numbers in 2040. As part of the proposed revisions requested by the City Council, the City’s 2040
population target would go from 24,000 to 18,000. This reduction would allow the City to plan for a
more moderate amount of growth and development within the rural portions of the community, while
keeping a moderate level of growth and development within the urban service areas that will be
needed to help pay for the required infrastructure improvements.
At this time, Staff does not recommend any changes to the Comprehensive Plan that would lower the
overall household and population projections until a final forecast for Lake Elmo is adopted by the
Metropolitan Council. This forecast is expected to be finalized sometime in the spring of 2014. The
Planning Commission may want to recommend any adjustments to the plan for rural development
areas based on the recent updates that focused the land use within the urban service areas.
BACKGROUND
The City of Lake Elmo’s land use plan has undergone significant changes since the City was
incorporated into its present form over 30 years ago. At that time, the City’s Comprehensive Plan
was essentially divided into two primary areas: the areas that had been developed and subdivided
prior to 1980 (i.e. the Tri-Lakes and Village areas) and the City’s agricultural and rural residential
development areas. As far back as the late 1970’s the City has maintained zoning regulations that
have established a minimum lot size of 10 acres in rural residential zones and 40 acres in agricultural
zones. Any developments with parcels smaller than 10 acres were mostly platted prior to 1979 under
either township regulations or a City ordinance that closely followed township requirements.
Beginning with the City’s adoption of the 1979 Zoning Ordinance, areas that contained existing
platted lots, with a few exceptions, were grouped into a single family zoning district with a minimum
lot size requirement of 1.5 acres (the former R-1 district). This minimum was based partially on the
need to provide adequate room for septic systems on these lots, even though many of the parcels in
these single family areas did not meet the lot size requirement. Parcels with less than the minimum
required area were, and are still, considered legal non-conforming lots. The expansion of the single
family R-1 district has been discouraged by the City’s more recent comprehensive plans.
Since the adoption of the 1979 zoning regulations, the City has adopted three significant land use
changes to regulate growth and development within the rural development areas. These major policy
updates have included the following:
• As part of the 1990 Comprehensive Plan update, the City adopted a goal to establish a new
zoning category for residential development with a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres per unit and
a maximum net density of 3 units per 10 acres. This led to the creation of the RE –
Residential Estates zoning district, which is still in place today. With subsequent
comprehensive plan amendments, the City has moved away from the designation of any new
land for RE development.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
3
• In 1996 the City adopted a Comprehensive Plan amendment to guide most of the remaining
rural and agricultural portions of the community for open space development. This led to the
creation of the Open Space regulations that have been in place since this time. When first
adopted, the open space requirements allowed up to 16 homes per 40 acres, but this was
subsequently revised to allow densities of 18 homes per 40 acres (or 0.45 units per acre).
With later plan amendments, the City categorized the areas guided for open space
development as “Rural Agricultural Density” or RAD. Within the RAD category, working
farms, alternative agricultural uses, and low density residential developments (10+ acre lots)
are allowed, with a specific notation that new development is allowed consistent with the
City’s open space regulations. This language has been in place since the 2005
Comprehensive Plan update.
• Without going into a detailed history of the City’s dispute with the Metropolitan Council, the
City agreed to accept new sewered development as part of a negotiated agreement with the
Met Council. Lake Elmo therefore undertook a major comprehensive plan revision in 2005
that identified two new growth areas within the community that will be serviced by public
sanitary sewer. One such area was located along the I-94 Corridor while the other included
existing and proposed development within the Village Planning area. The City did not
substantially alter the RAD land use category at this time, and left any land not previously
developed and located outside of the new sewered growth areas in the RAD category. Given
the new household and population forecasts that were adopted by the City in 2005, it was
determined that there would not be enough development in the RAD areas to accommodate
this growth; hence the RAD-2 land use category was created to allow additional development
in limited locations at a density of two units per acre.
For the most part, the City’s development standards within rural development areas (classified as
RAD current Comprehensive Plan) have not been substantially revised since the open space zoning
approach was adopted. Some areas were removed from this category to provide room for sewered
development, and a few select parcels have been moved into the RAD-2 category. The City now has
18 open space developments located in all portions of the City, and there is room to accommodate
additional open space developments in the future.
The RAD-2 category is somewhat unique because it was not part of the original amendment that
created opportunities for open space development. The creation of the RAD-2 land use category was
done after a review by the City indicated that there was not enough developable land in the RAD
development areas to accommodate the number of rural households required to achieve the
population forecasts that came out of the City’s 2004 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with
the Met Council. After performing an analysis of the rural areas, it was decided that and additional
250-300 units of housing above and beyond the number that would be achieved under the existing
RAD densities would be needed to meet the requirements of the MOU. Two sites with a total
acreage of 142 acres were included in the RAD-2 category as part of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan
update on order to accommodate 284 additional units of housing within the rural development areas.
Since the adoption of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan update, the City has approved the required
decennial updates to the Plan in 2009 and further updated the land use and housing chapters to
accommodate refinements to the sewered growth areas. The City did not take any action to adopt
zoning regulations specific to the RAD-2 areas until it was presented with land use request to change
the RAD designation of a 24-acre parcel along Stillwater Boulevard from RAD to RAD-2. This
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
4
request, and the subsequent action taken by the City, are reviewed in greater detail a little later in this
memorandum.
GROWTH PROJECTIONS/DENSTY ALAYSIS
In preparation for discussions concerning proposed updates to the Comprehensive Plan in 2010, the
Planning Department conducted an analysis of the City’s rural development areas in order to better
understand the need to accommodate additional housing in these areas. The resulting report that was
presented to the City Council is attached for review by the Planning Commission. Please note that
since this information was assembled, the City has received its household and population numbers
from the 2010 Census, which shows a modest increase from the household numbers that Staff was
using at the time. Because these numbers are very close to one another and Staff was using the 2009
figure (instead of the 2010 census amount) the information cited below has not been updated.
Additionally, please keep in mind that the City Council ultimately adopted new population and
household growth forecasts as part of the recent land use plan amendments. The amendments do not
create the need to revise any of Staff analysis concerning rural areas from 2010 since the rural growth
projections were not impacted by the sewered land use changes.
To briefly summary the 2010 Staff analysis of rural development areas, please consider the
following:
• In 2009 there were estimated to be 2,814 households in Lake Elmo.
• By removing those existing households that will be connected to sewer in the future, Staff
estimated that the household count in the City’s RAD development areas was 2,120.
• The household projections included in the 2005 and 2013 Comp Plan updated show that
3,527 households will be located in the rural development areas in 2030.
• By subtracting existing housing units from the 2030 projection for rural areas, Staff
determined that 1,407 units would need to be built in rural development areas between 2010
and 2030 to achieve the population and household forecasts.
• A review of platter lots within the rural development areas in 2010 identified 148 vacant lots.
By removing these lots from the needed household count, Staff determined that the City
would need to allow for 1,259 additional units of housing in rural areas in order to achieve
the growth projections. Since no new rural development lots have been platted since 2010,
this number still represents an accurate accounting of needed future growth.
As part of this exercise, Staff researched the amount of land that is still available to accommodate the
1,259 housing units and studied three alternatives to accommodate this growth by either:
1) Assuming all development would follow current zoning requirements for rural
development areas, and specifically, the densities allowed under OP and RED zoning.
For this scenario, Staff only considered parcels larger than 40 acres as available for OP
developments since this is the current minimum area requirement. This was described a
conservative approach;
2) Keeping the above assumptions, but calculating potential development potential using a
20-acre minimum for OP developments. This would open up additional potential for OP
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
5
developments that could otherwise not be constructed under a 40-acre minimum
requirement. Staff referred to this scenario as a moderate growth strategy;
3) Taking a more aggressive approach with the assumptions form item (1) and projecting
that all parcels over 10 acres in size would be developed as part of an open space
development.
The result of this excise showed that the City could expect rural population growth of 1,070 units
using the conservative assumptions from above, 1,422 with a the more moderate approach, or 1,578
or more units with a very aggressive zoning approach. These results indicate that the conservative
(or status quo) approach would not allow the City to achieve its growth targets for 2030. Please note
that Staff did consider the areas currently guided for RAD-2 and RED in these calculations, and the
units projected for these areas are included in the numbers for each growth strategy. Expanding the
areas guided for RAD-2 would alter the above estimates by increasing the household totals
proportionate to the amount of land added to the RAD-2 category.
Since Staff completed this analysis, the City did proceed with updates to the Comprehensive Plan,
but did not make any changes to the areas outside of the urban services boundary. The City has also
recently received an updated Met Council forecast for population and household growth that is
substantially lower than the 24,000 currently referenced in the City’s planning documents and as
specified in the 2005 MOU. In order to respond in a timely manner to the preliminary Met Council
forecast, the City Council has developed a response that requests the following:
• 2040 population of 18,000 (reduced by 6,000)
• 2040 household count of 6,545 (reduced by 2,182)
• 2040 REC unit count of 5,000 (reduced by 1,600)
The Staff report to the City Council outlining a response to the Met Council forecasts is attached to
this document. Should these revised numbers be accepted by the Met Council, the City would be in a
position to reduce the growth projections within rural development areas to a more moderate level.
In this case, the Council has recommended reducing the portion of new households within rural areas
to 720 units, well below the current number of 1,407.
RAD AND RAD-ALT REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Prior to 2010, the City had only identified two potential sites for the RAD-2 land use category. In
early 2010, the City received an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan to add a new 24-acre
parcel into this future land use category in order to facilitate the a proposed development at 9442
Stillwater Boulevard North. The developer for this project proposed to construct a senior living
complex, townhouses, and a farm-based preschool on the site, but was not able to move forward
without a land use plan amendment. In addition, the City had not yet created zoning regulations that
corresponded to the RAD-2 designation; however, the applicant’s request included an amendment to
create a new OP-2 zoning district.
When this matter was brought before the Planning Commission for review, Staff did not recommend
approval of the proposed amendments for a number of reasons, citing 1) the lack of build out within
existing open space developments, 2) the lack of any substantial changes since the Comprehensive
Plan was adopted that would warrant the change, 3) language in the Comprehensive Plan that
encourages multi-family and senior development within sewer service areas, and 4) the
incompatibility of the propose land uses with the uses allowed in the City’s rural development areas.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
6
Based partly on positive feedback from residents in the community and a desire to move forward
with a unique project, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the land use and zoning
amendments, which were ultimately adopted the City Council. The City now has guided three
distinct areas for RAD-2 development (which was renamed RAD-ALT as part of the recent
amendments) including the property at 9442 Stillwater Boulevard North. These areas are currently
depicted on the City’s Future land use map (see Map 3-3 attached) and include:
• Approximately 36 acres located immediately north of 10th Street at the intersection of
Manning Avenue and 10th Street.
• Approximately 173 acres of land located northeast of the intersection of State Highway 5 and
Ideal Avenue close to the City’s western boundary with Oakdale.
• The 24 site at 9442 Stillwater Boulevard North
One of the key questions for the City as City moves forward with implementation of the
Comprehensive Plan is whether or not there should be an alternate land use category that allows for
increased development and land uses other than single family homes within the City’s rural
development areas. Based on the analysis presented above, the areas that have been guided for
RAD-ALT development will help the City achieve its growth targets; however, it does appear very
likely that the City will be receiving some form of relief from the 2005 population targets. Should
the revised projections be implemented, the original pressure that led to the creation of the RAD-2
category would likely go away.
In addition, there are other ways that the City can accommodate growth within rural areas, for
instance, by either increasing the allowed density in RAD areas (i.e. from 18 homes per 40 acres to
20 homes per 40 acres) or by allowing OP developments on parcels less than 40 acres. Another
option to add units within rural development areas would be to reduce the minimum lot size
requirements for A – Agriculture and RR – Rural Residential zoning districts, which are presently set
at 40 acres and 10 acres respectfully. The other relevant question that should be considered by the
Planning Commission is whether or not the City should be considering an expansion of the allowed
uses within rural development areas to accommodate things like senior housing and the provision of
goods and services for the community. The City Council has also asked that the Planning
Commission consider reducing the minimum lot size requirement within rural areas, and to
specifically consider allowing new residential construction on parcels of less than 10 acres.
Any of these, or similar, actions will have implications for how the City’s rural area will grow and
develop over the next 30 years and should be considered within the context of the City’s overall
goals and objectives. With the above comments in mind, please note the City’s overreaching mission
statement for land use planning as adopted by the Council which reads:
“To thoughtfully adopt a City-wide Comprehensive Plan that maintains the open space
character of the community while balancing attractive, sustainable growth opportunities that
meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Council.”
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (QUESTIONS)
Since this matter is being brought before the Planning Commission without a specific request or
recommendation, Staff would like to suggest that the Commission consider the following questions
as it considers the City’s land use planning in rural development areas:
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
7
• Should the minimum lot sizes in A and RR zoning districts be lowered in order to
accommodate increased opportunities for the use of larger parcels? Is 10 acres the optimal
number for preserving open space character?
• Does the City need to retain the RAD-ALT land use category, and should this land use be
eliminated if the proposed population forecasts are accepted by the Met Council?
• Would an increase in the types of allowed uses within rural development areas (i.e.
townhouses, senior housing, congregate housing, schools, community services, neighborhood
commercial) be consistent with the City’s stated goal of preserving open space character?
• Are the current uses allowed within rural areas appropriate? Is agriculture something that
should be more heavily encouraged by the City?
• Is the density allowed within OP developments acceptable or is it too high or too low? Have
the existing OP developments contributed towards or detracted from the City’s open space
character?
• The City’s land use plan does not allow for the expansion of RS – Rural Single Family or RE
– Residential Estates areas; these zoning districts have been restricted to existing
development only. Should new developments be allowed that are zoned in this manner?
In order to facilitate the Planning Commission discussion on these matters, or any others that might
be raised by the public of the Commission, Staff will spend time at the meeting reviewing the reports,
projections and land use plans that are referenced in this report and will present a more detailed
summary of the questions that are raised above. At this point, Staff is seeking general guidance from
the Commission, and will be presenting any specific direction from the meeting back to the City
Council.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the list of questions that have been
raised in the Staff report within the context of the information present in and attached this report.
Any specific recommendations should be made in the form of a motion.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Met Council Forecast Discussion – 10/15/13 Council Report
2. Rural Development Analysis – 7/6/10 Council Report
3. OP-2 Zoning Regulations
4. Lake Elmo Future Land Use Map (Map 3-3)
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ....................................................... Community Development Director
- Report by Staff .................................................. Community Development Director
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Public Coments ................................................................................................ Chair
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
8
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5b – BUSINESS ITEM
Planning Commission
Date: 5/29/13
Business Item
Item: 6b
ITEM: Discussion of Rural Agricultural Density (RAD and RAD-ALT) Guidance in
the Comprehensive Plan
REQUESTED BY: Planning Department
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to review and discuss the portions of the recently
adopted Comprehensive Plan pertaining to areas in the City that are guided for Rural Agricultural
Density (RAD). In particular, the City Council has directed the Commission to review the areas
that are guided for alternative RAD densities (formerly RAD2 designations in the previous
Comprehensive Plan) in light of the recent expiration of concept plans for a proposed
development on the site of the Friedrich Farm at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North.
At this time, Staff is not recommending that the Planning Commission make any changes to the
Comprehensive Plan, but has put together the brief report below in order to help guide discussion
on this topic. Should the Commission wish to make any changes to the City’s Plan, Staff has also
suggested a range of actions/direction that the Planning Commission should consider.
BACKGROUND/ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
For roughly two decades, the City of Lake Elmo has guided land outside any existing platted lots
for a land use classified as Rural Agricultural Development (RAD). This future land use
designation allows the continued use of land for agricultural and rural residential purposes, but
also allows for the development of land that is consistent with the City’s Open Space Preservation
Ordinance. The allowed residential densities in these areas have changed slightly over these two
decades, but at present, the RAD designation allows up to 0.45 units per acre (or 18 residential
lots per 40 acres).
As part of the City’s agreement with the Metropolitan Council to accommodate its share of the
regional population growth forecasts, Lake Elmo has agreed to designate portions of the City for
urban development at higher densities and to serve these areas with regional sewer services. As
part of this compromise, the City was able to keep undeveloped areas outside of the future sewer
areas (the Village and I-94 Planning Areas) under the previous land use guidance of RAD.
Furthermore, all areas that were not previously platted or that are outside of the urban service
areas will continue to be guided for rural development in accordance with the general RAD
classification.
One of the issues that arose from the agreement with the Met Council; however, is that the City
was given an overall population and household target for the year 2030, and was granted some
discretion on how to allocate these units across the entire City. So although a large portion of
these future units were sent into the sewer areas, there were still a significant number of
residential units that were allocated to the rural development areas. After reviewing the maximum
development potential within the City’s rural areas (using the 0.40 units per acre maximum in
place at the time), the City determined that it would either need to allocate more units into the
sewered development areas or find an alternate way to accommodate more growth within the
rural areas. The resulting action by the City to address this problem was to increase the RAD
density to 0.45 units per acre and to create a RAD-2 classification that alows up to two units per
acre in areas guided accordingly. The City then identified two sites with 142 acres that, along
with the bump in the previous RAD density, allowed the household and population targets to be
met.
When the City updated its Comprehensive Plan for the I-94 Corridor, the entire land use plan
(outside of the Village Planning Area) was updated as well. The current plan kept all of the
previous land use categories within the rural areas, but provided a somewhat modified description
for each and renamed the RAD-2 classification to RAD – Alternative Densities in order to better
reflect the purpose for this land use category. The RAD categories are now described as follows:
RURAL AREA DEVELOPMENT – This category represents the large areas of rural
residential development within the City. Common uses found in these areas include working
farms, alternative agricultural uses as defined by City Code, and rural single family detached
residences. Development in these areas requires 10+ acres, or a conditional use permit to
authorize a cluster development meeting the City’s Open Space Preservation regulations.
Densities are allowed up to 0.45 dwelling units per buildable acre when planned as part of
an Open Space Preservation development. No new areas of rural area development are
being established by the official land use plan. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): A, RR,
OP]
RURAL AREA DEVELOPMENT – ALTERNATE DENSITY – This land use category
represents a subset of land guided for Rural Area Development and provides for an increase
in the densities allowed through an Open Space Preservation development of up to 2.0
dwelling units per buildable acre. Further increases in the base density may be allowed
through a Planned Unit Development through incentives for density bonuses that are
permitted as part of a PUD and that maintain the open space character of a development.
In addition to single-family residences and townhouses, multi-family housing for seniors is
permitted in this district. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): A, RR, OP-2]
All other rural development categories (including Residential Estates and Rural Single Family
areas) were carried forward from the previous version of the Comprehensive Plan.
CURRENT ISSUES:
Prior to adoption of the revised Comprehensive Plan, the City received a request to change the
future land use designation of 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD to RAD-2 in conjunction
with a proposed Senior Living/Farm School project on the site of the Friedrich family farmstead.
This request was approved by the City Council and added a third area to the RAD-2 future land
use category. As part this approval, the Planning Commission and Council adopted findings
noting that recently approved subdivisions in the City’s rural areas were approved at a density
below the unit levels anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan and that the density increase would
be offset by reductions previously approved and acknowledged by the City.
Upon approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment for this site, the City approved a second
OP – Open Space Preservation zoning district in order to accommodate development within the
RAD-2 areas and also approved a concept plan for a 49-unit senior living project for the property
at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. The City’s zoning ordinance specifies that an applicant must
submit preliminary plans for a development within a year of concept plan approval in order for
these plans to remain valid; however, the applicant, after two extension requests were granted by
the City, did not submit preliminary plans in accordance with this deadline. The project is no
longer valid as previously approved by the City, and future development on the site will need to
restart at the concept plan stage.
2
Please note that the Council resolution approving the Comprehensive Plan amendment did note
that the approval was contingent upon Council approval of final plans for the site. Under State
law, this contingency does not mean that the property will automatically revert back to the
previous land use category. Any change to the Comprehensive Plan must go through the formal
review process (including a public hearing with the Planning Commission and review by the Met
Council), and cannot proceed without the authorization of the Council. Given the cost, time and
effort associated with such a plan amendment, Staff will not proceed with any further
modifications of the Comprehensive Plan without direction from the City Council.
Staff would also like to note the following about the Friedrich RAD-2 site:
• The RAD-2 designation (now called RAD-ALT) was kept for the property as part of the
2013 future land use updates.
• The property owner has expressed their preference to keep the current land use
designation and does not want to see any changes made to their property.
• Any new development proposal for the site would need to start at the concept plan stage
and comply with all associated application and review requirements.
As part of its review of the Friedrich development plans, the Council did discuss the potential to
allow density transfers within RAD areas as one way to accommodate additional density on some
sites while retaining the overall housing and population targets for the City. Staff has not done
any additional research into a potential density transfer program since the initial Council
discussion, and has instead been focused on other Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance
amendment projects to date.
Staff has previously done some analysis as recently as 2010 to examine development patterns
throughout the City and to gauge whether or not the City is on track with its household and
population targets. At that time, Staff projected that the City would need an additional 1,259 rural
households to meet its targets, and that there were 3,386 developable acres of land guided RAD
to accommodate this growth. Although a rough calculation would indicate that there is adequate
acreage to accommodate the 1,259 units in these RAD areas, Staff pointed out that much of the
land that is guided RAD is in parcels of 20 acres or less, and therefore not eligible for open space
development (which requires 40 acres as a minimum). Staff looked at three growth strategies
from conservative to aggressive for these areas that would allow OP development on parcels
down to 10 acres in size and found that a moderate approach would be in the best interest of the
City. This means that the City will need to find ways to accommodate additional growth within
rural areas either by increasing densities across the board, applying the RAD-ALT designation to
additional properties, or by reducing the minimum OP development size requirement down to 20
acres.
STAFF REPORT/OPTIONS:
Because the Council has only given general direction to the Planning Commission, Staff will be
discussing City’s RAD areas with Commission at its meeting, and will be seeking any direction
from the Commission as a result of this discussion. Given the complexity of the terms, issues
and history associated with the RAD and RAD-ALT use designations, Staff will spend time at the
next Planning Commission meeting reviewing this memorandum and tak ing questions from the
Commission.
At this point, given the numerous planning and zoning issues in front of the Planning
Commission, Staff is not recommending any changes to the Comprehensive Plan to re-designate
any RAD or RAD-ALT areas to a different land use category. This recommendation is also
partially based on the fact that the City will be receiving a revised regional forecasts from the Met
Council fairly soon. The Met Council has agreed to continue working with the City at refining the
population, household, and sewered unit mandates that are part of its agreement with the City,
and furthermore, this work will incorporate changes to the regional forecasts and could lead to
revised population targets and a revised time frame for compliance with those targets. Any
3
revisions will likely have impacts to the City’s rural development areas which will need additional
review and discussion in the near future.
Should the Commission wish to address the City’s RAD and RAD-ALT areas, Staff would
recommend the following as potential direction from the Commission:
• No change – see Staff recommendation above.
• Amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the Friedrich RAD-ALT site back to the RAD
classification.
• Amend the Comprehensive Plan to change all RAD-ALT sites back to RAD with or
without a corresponding increase in density somewhere else in the Comprehensive Plan.
• Change all RAD densities to 0.5 units per acre (20 homes per 40 acres) and either
eliminate or keep the RAD-ALT densities of 2.0 units per acre.
• Allow OP development on parcels smaller than 40 acres consistent with the moderate
growth strategy previously offered by Staff.
• Direct all RAD-ALT densities to urban sewered districts and revert these areas back to
the RAD designation.
• Any other direction as deemed prudent by the Planning Commission.
Staff will be able to further discuss any of the above options or alternative actions with the
Commission at the meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the City’s RAD and RAD-ALT
development areas and to provide any direction concerning these areas for consideration by the
City Council.
ATTACHMENTS (1):
1. Lake Elmo Existing and Proposed RAD-2 Area (from Previous Comprehensive
Plan Amendment)
4
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 7/14/14
AGENDA ITEM: 4C – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2013-38
ITEM: Zoning Map Amendments – Perfecting Amendments
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to adopt an updated Zoning Map that addresses several
land use and development projects that have recently been approved by the City. Staff is also
recommending amendments that will remove the transitional zoning for several properties in the
Village that are guided for rural/agricultural use as part of the Village Open Space Plan in addition to
other minor corrections from previous maps.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City-initiated action for discussion
Request: Adopt an updated Zoning Map for the City.
History: The City completed a major map revision in 2013 to incorporate the RT – Rural
Transitional Zoning classification as part of the map. Other recent amendments
have been made in conjunction with specific development proposals.
Deadline for Action: None
Applicable Regulations: Comprehensive Plan – Chapter III: Land Use Plan
Zoning Ordinance – Article 8: Zoning Districts and Zoning Map
REVIEW DETAILS
All of the requested changes to the Zoning Map are based on approvals given or actions already
taken by the City, or are intended to bring the Map into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed changes include the following:
Parcel/Description Existing
Zoning
Proposed Zoning
Well Number 4 – 11210 50th Street North RR PF - Public Facilities
5 parcels west of Lake Elmo Avenue and north
of 43rd Street (Village Planning Open Space)
RT A – Agriculture
3 parcels west of Lake Elmo Avenue and south
of 43rd Street (Village Planning Open Space)
RT RR – Rural Residential
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4c – BUSINESS ITEM
2
Parcel immediately north of Village Preserve
Development and east of Lake Elmo Avenue
(Village Planning Open Space)
RT RR – Rural Residential
3280 Klondike Avenue RT RS – Rural Single Family
Residential
3150 Klondike Avenue RT A – Agriculture
3000 Klondike Avenue RT RR – Rural Residential
11580 30th Street N RT RS – Rural Single Family
Residential
3075 Lisbon Avenue N RT RS – Rural Single Family
Residential
11520 30th Street North RT RS – Rural Single Family
Residential
3080 Lisbon Avenue N RT PF – Public Facility
3040 Lisbon Avenue N (Townhouses) RT RS – Rural Single Family
Residential
Hammes Estates RT LDR – Low Density Residential
Northwest quadrant of I-94 and Keats Avenue
(includes Kwik Trip site)
RT C – Commercial
Hunter’s Crossing RT LDR – Low Density Residential
Air Lake Development – northeast quadrant of
I-94 and Lake Elmo Avenue
RT BP – Business Park
Because the proposed map amendments are intended to address developments or projects that have
already been approved by the City, Staff is recommending approval of all changes as presented.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt an updated Zoning Map that incorporates
the revisions noted above.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Zoning Map
2. Existing Zoning Map
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ....................................................... Community Development Director
- Report by Staff .................................................. Community Development Director
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4c – BUSINESS ITEM
3
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Public Comments ............................................................................................. Chair
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4c – BUSINESS ITEM
10TH ST N
HUDSON BLVD
MA
N N IN
G
A
V
E
N
L AK
E
EL
MO
AV
E
N
I NW
OO
D AV
E N
STILLWATER BLVD N
34TH ST N
50TH ST N
KE
AT
S AV
E N
15TH ST N
ID
E A L AV
E N
20TH ST N
LAKE JANE TRL N
30TH ST N
53RD ST N
27TH ST N
JA
M A CA
AV
E N
55TH
S
T
N
JANE RD N
47TH ST N
DE
MO
N TR
E
VI
L
LE
T
R
L
N
57TH S T N
59TH ST N
5 1 S T S T S
3 1 S T ST N
43RD ST N
L E GI
O
N
AV
E N
39TH ST N
38TH ST N
4 2ND ST N
O
LSONLAKETRL
N
H
I
L
L
T
R
L
N
KI
M BR
O
A
V
E N
33 R D ST N
24 TH ST N
26TH ST N
32ND ST N
JU L E P A V E N
H I D D E N B A Y T R L N
L IL
Y AV
E
N
C I M A R R O N
I V Y
A
V E N
5 8 T H S T N
H
I
L
L
T
O
P
A
V
E
N
21ST ST N
ST I LL WA TE R LN N
I
RISAVE
N
M A N N I N G T R L N
45TH ST N
9TH ST N
IV
O
R
Y
AV
E N
12TH ST N
LA
V
E RN
E AV
E N
J A S M I N E A V E N
JE
W
ELAVEN
44TH ST N
56TH ST N
LEGION LNN
35TH ST N
KE
L VI
N
A
V
E
N
37TH ST N
36TH ST N
J A M A C A B L V D N
JA
M
L
E
Y
A
V
E
N
DEER P O N D T R L N
L
I
N
D
E
N
A
V
E
N
K
L
O
N
D
I
K
E
A
V
E
N
LINDEN
T
R
L
N
J
A
N
E
C
T
N
I M P E R I A L A V E N
55TH ST
I S LE AV E N
22ND ST N
UP P ER 33 RD S T N
4
0
T
H
S
T
N
T
A
P
E
S
T
R
Y
T
R
L
28TH ST N
K IR
K
W OO
D
AV
E N
16TH ST N
M A R Q U E S S T R L N
3RDSTREE T PL N
H
Y
T
R
A
I
L
A
V
E
N
L IL
AC
L
N N
LISBON
CT
N
T A P E S T R Y
R D
JER OME
A VE N
K
I
N
D
R
E
D
W
AY
1
4
T
H
S
T
N
HIGHL
A
N
D
S
T
R
L
N
E A G L E P O IN T B L V D
IVY CT N
J A N E C I R N
JONQUIL TRL N
IR O N WOOD
T
R
L
N
J AS
PE
R AV
E N
W H I S T L I N G VA L LEYR
D
LA
Y
T
O
N
A
V
E
N
JAMACA CT N
I SLE
C T N
J A CK
PI
N
E T
R L N
JULEPCT N
B I R C H B A R K T R L N
LEE
W
A
R
D
A
V
E
N
J
O
N
Q
U
IL
A
V
E
N
JA
N
E
R
O
A
V
E
N
L I SB
O
N
A VE
N
IR
I
S
H A
V
E
N
LILAC PL N
I
R
I
S
H
C
T
N
TAPESTR
Y
H
L
H
I
G
H
L
A
N
D
S
C
T
N
IR
VI N C T N
JUL
E P W A Y
M A RQUESS LN N
49TH ST N
WINDBREAK TRL N 44TH LN N
5 7 T H
S T
C I R N
IR
VI
N C
IR
N
BLUESTEM LN N
K
R
A
F
T
C
I
R
N
TAPEST R Y B N D
LILAC WAY N
IVORY CT
DE
E
R P O N D C
T N
L
A
N
G
L
Y
C
T
N
IN
NS
D
A LE
A
V E N
11TH ST N
T A PESTRYGRV
1 0 TH
S
T
R
E
E T L
N
N
2
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
T
N
22ND CT N
L A Y TO
N
C T
N
1
0
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
T
N
L
A
V
E
R
N
E
C
T
N
WH I S T L I NG V A L LE Y T R L
IR
W
IN
A
V
E
N
J
A
S
M
I
N
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
P
L
N
K
I
R
K
W
O
O
D
L
N
N
DEMON
T
R
E
V
I
L
L
E
T
R
A
IL CIR N
LITTLE BLU E S T E M C I R N
MA
RQ
UE
S
S T RA
IL
C
T N
59TH STREET CT N
5 8 T H S
T
C
T
N
30THSTREETCIRN
2 0 TH
S
T
R E ET
CT
N
LEGION LN CIR N
IN
N S D AL
E A
V
E
N
10TH ST N
J O N Q U I L T R L N
53RD S T N
39TH ST N
K E A TS
AV
E N
32ND ST N
HIGH
LA N DS TRL
N
21ST ST N
I
N
N
S
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
N
57T
H
S
T
N
STILLWATER BLVD N
LILYA
V
E
N
J A M AC
A A
VE
N
36TH ST N
I SL
E
A V E N
WHISTLING VALLEY RD
55TH ST N
37TH ST N
L A Y TO
N
AV
E
N
KE
AT
S AV
E
N
50TH ST N
34TH S T N
L IL
Y AV
E
N
LA
KE
E LM
O
AV
E
N
3 5 T H ST N
I
R
O
N
W
O
O
D
T
R
L
N
59TH ST N
35TH S T N
L EG
I
O
N
AV
E N
J U L E P A V E N
M A N N I N G A
V
E
N
K
E
A
T
S
A
V
E
N
28TH ST N
2525
1786
1515
1876
11455
10880
901
8281
8251
2298
4564
3501
5500
9941
10321
11455
10380
9130
9075
10105
456
10190
616
11530
11332
9524
5235
3150
11421
9579
2641
8280
8940
9109
901 820
9591
2500
8989
11490
8775
10386
9434
5193
2490
520
10112
11351
4670
8770
4452
10711
9200
11975
5275
10193
11980
4370
9140
3045
3855
54155435
10240
5825
1412
9940
8465
9070
11211
4212
11260
8866
2685
8555
9057
5200
4950
4890
9825
5295
5900
5699
10830
81558135
8989
12058
9765
5222
5250
3503
5761
11351
8650
1304
10550
5749
11260
3360
4890
5545
4755
10472
4890
4690
5255
4455
2450
3691
3870
9999
4620
5471
4596
8955
9255
3467
5135
5040
9200 9220
5190
8975
5429
8970
1069910579 107591063910519
8740
10231
4779
4525
928
872
814
760
704
10133
11330
8291
8268
3000
10755
10350
9696
12202
10732
10875
750
11491
11658
11050
10830
11311
11255
11514
10689
5220
3655
11817
11180
11165
4384
11347
9495
11240
9524
9585
9535
655
8243
11980
8400
11678
8243
781
5615
10120
8470
9447
9765
10824
11465
723
2901
855
10323
5416
8450
11989
8633
4424
9393
5414
2244
687
9440
8633
11790
921
2895
8006
3082
8141
9425
3681
8552
11144
11530
11459
5427
9242
5760
5300
5230
8420
5170
5110
9265
8271
975
5577
8530
4454
3536
5660
8430
5630
4375
4477
5050
5240
11580
5055
5272
8171
1532
8863
8810
11415
9345
2270
2767
5638
5080
8707
8042
4989
3036
5750
3077
11361
8737
8565
9155
1543
4550
9844
11530
10550
9759
9480
876
5247
9521
9498
3303
561
8519
9494
3733
10092
859
820
9605
8449
8080
812
790
755
873
8420
914
2678
8550
9800
832
483
3554
4201
577
8321
883
2906
747
3817
521
5014
8319
868
8411
2890
3560
11011
5257
3455
8394
2656
772
2813
697
772
617
820
785
854
968
724
858
881867
371
650 665
331
3812
418
887
875
488
568
605
877
974
429
871
770
220
694
829
5629
978
3505
84578367
585
9876
5673
10841
8879
5011
9250
3880
3520
9830
8281
2811
9605
2749
9260
5367 9655
8996
9389
5290
4415
2696
8028
9855
3548
5337
9380
5274
9636
9652
3280
8884
11825
9747
5715
8800
2580
5791
8255
9784
11676
3592
9571
3669
3663
5170
2269
9692
2618
8364
9580
9612
8620
8226
9393
9618
9965
9481
9873
9120
2528
2798
3793
2737
2760
8468
2119
3432
2677
9744
5277
11325
8284
9323
8241
3443
8120
8165
9395
9568
9163
10021
8382
3200
5611
9250
9343
8154
10015
8611
9386
8215
5424
2296
5855
9961
9400
3080
1535
9391
8414
9715
8151
8410
3435
9387
2699
9486
9798
9719
8454
8125
8180
2850
9768
9275
9710
4990
9251
989098349670 9940
9875
9543
9895
9179
9896
3424
9106
9805
2038
2769
9800
2841
3584
9314
8119
9073
8680
8134
5324
3033
2655
9455
9034
3572
1509
4026
9123
8074
8311
8340
8219
8047
8206
8271
9515
9576 9589
8260
8263
8276
9023
9945
9170
8335
8330
1521
9960
9855
8585
5307
8945
802
11343
11030
5771
4990
4910
9125
5385
4955
8010
5131
8727
10735
8170
9377
5833
1080
2835
9220
11550
11550
11550
5277
11991
8950
8881
5247
8717
5404
9320
8241
3407
2715
3408
8244
8247
8211
8388
3948
8401
4855
9355
9360
5710
5180
8500
8665
8234
8603
5270
2876
8880
5217
404
8490
5875
9906
2040
1304
5685
4768
2626
8367
9095
5412
5187
8375
5034
3825
8190
5110
4995
5217
10375
9280
2895
9280
5070
9302
10950
8810
2925
8060
2960
7760
8896
2525
5090
1199
2543
9333
8001
9363
3141
8230
2069
9203
5422
11674
5400
9018
5350
8820
5110
2816
5730
2224
1875
8790
5737
9581
8344
8478
7805
9243
8419
5445
11233
4860
3075
8301
2961
5730
1095
5757
5130
8254
5777
5025
7821
10774
7803
8341
8030
11048
2443
11295
8070
10376
2930
4940
4960
8310
5267
8225
8282
5230
9525
9303
5885
4880
4060
9295
8455
10819
5193
10903
10010
5745
11685
8485
9030
3060
11546
8800
9520
9078
8260
4405
5750
8030
8870
5150
1067
4850
5171
8409 8586
5690
4870
9385
10664
9287
8331
9250
10802
8351
2430
9400
10728
1025
2189
10833
8371
8110
5055
2393
11240
8391
8644
10847
4955
10746
4980
8268
2455
4865
5158
5120
4850
5072
2965
5150
1020
2470
5226
8352
1957
1140
1028
1080
2055
2450
2320
3473
9191
4854
2796
9517
8040
1019
8100
2935
1069
1115
8982
7990
1177
1145
1123
2856
8898
9160
5080
2621
8483
5124
2655
8867
9523
2450
8916
8965
1073
1027
8938
1093
9220
2410
3819
8962
2101
10922
5227
4596
2245
10875
5040
5060
8170
10963
5890
4515
84158139832183098171826183758229
83908370
10931
8320
5237
8572
5170
4960
8415
2461
9123
5747
10858
5211
8211
5701
9112
5020
8549
2333
10791
8980
5151
5790
10024
50557816
5420
8611
7761
2289
11171
11040
9055
4823
5487
5130
1696
9280
2225
11202
11345
7824
11108
5201
5410
8509
2470
8170
10071
8142
2267
5025
8292
275
5853
9498
10763
9682
4388
4926
3759
8167
7920
5750
5850
5770
5200
2227
5790
5171
10368
9706
8573
5500
3161
11047
8021
4346
2345
5810
4260
2491
10895
11063
8331
8011
3077
8001
8030
2440
5736
2479
2311
9901
2445
5171
4070
8180
5080
2395
9240
4009
11395
10072
9219
11355
9404
10830 10886
3047
1683
2175
11230
4275
11075
11150
8475
11075
11365
11190
8627
2935
9754
8140
5121
5043
4071
9098
11109
3765
3914
3797
5810
11320
8110
11115
4091
9757
11110
8080
5230
5960
5933
11350
11227
8690
8050
8050
3095
5235
11385
8509
2229
11066
11066
11375
1131411270
11140
11277
11320
11407
8989
5815
8470 8603
10825
4996
5920
8274
5151
3337
5459
5085
4748
5111
5830
9189
10380
9436
3065
5787
2750
9040
4732
8860
8330
8193
31509181
10079
8890
3476
3440
9032
9497
5065
8670
7730
7872
8350
5831
9986
8815
812580958065 8215815581858045
4171
5165
4061
8370
7840
5231
3100
3070
8265
9654
8390
7931
8000
2194
4855
5850
37203889
7856
4110
7832
9811
7982
11950
5261
5111
5321
5620
2315
9717
5091
5291
5693
3052
5870
2773
5775
3704
9550
8245
5724
4150
5260
2204
1446
9915
8567
8243
1985
2793
2340
2914
9615
4635
4100
2899
7818
5131
2380
5071
8510
8845
4966
9275
4140
5710
9402
4131
8875
5440
2337
2684
2700
4030
9954
7962
8203
2632
2041
2075
8687
5811
7864
8021
8809
10353
2662
7741
2329
4190
9634
8555
5361
2415
8625
7898
5451
5290
83508312
5460
8548
2360
8100
9861
8815
8309
2965
8270
2110
8360
4277
4280
4280
87498405
5480
8775
7848
4260
7740
5431
5051
2706
4276
8529
7780
4220
7930
5771
8040
5791
5751
5680
7808
2120
5655
5640
5730
7920
2958
5597
9229
9788
2672
4235
4033
2867
9676
8771
3929
2874
5675
1584
2718
8790
2933
1525
4240
2823
2390
2722
2174
9125
2359
2735
4255
9621
4070
9732
4285
9149
1849
9524
9799
18051827 1757
1529
2257
8247
9829
1627
1709
1535
2301
1684
1743
4215
1517
4120
1779
1727
1583
1513
8996
1681
1663
16971694
1668
17561636
1654
1680
9548
4111
4077
9766
1645
9730
9155
5010
9828
9350
1873
8780
4260
8770
1567
4240
9771
2134
9602
9796 9884
9737
3909
55355531
8539
9476
4944
3415
5819
9498
9885
9576
8121
8110
8085
8080 81968160
8173
4101
5093
8465
8290
9340
9927
8332
5701
2575
9611
8245
5418
5725
9141
9590
8498
9399
4118
9148
8556
3160
8511
11392
9437
3936
8120
8702
2931
5197
8416
8546
10977
8264
8164
9605
8517
5734
9601
9929
3023
4990
9957
10042
2819 2958
11280
11612
3351
8271
3286
3025
12460
4849
4348
9703
41328255
9662
9843
4305
9620
9799
4146
9726
9492
9605
9818
2923
4220
2955
3014
4964
8224
8286
11430
8294
4075
9915
3982
11658
4711
9985
4982
8804
5647
9768
4258
1589
2927
11443
1525
9819
8955
8961
97299650
5677
8282
10356
2939
8879 89298839 8969
8928 89688808
5658
2998
4508
8382
8012
8160
1668
4327
4345
4941
10325
5659
2805
2877 2769
5760
8344
3960
8455
11040
7851
5810
5711
9406
10149
4758
11328
4863
5782
2928
9186
8278
8536
8910
4167
9740
8533
11909
11051
4385
3078
11933
5840
11152
5671
2911
11880
11619
4633
11140
9949
9477
8431
4177
8015
4465
4092
9776
2907
8600
2932
11828
4589
2971
8528
4629
5736
1550
1594
1578
1650
1634
1571
4830
8320
1545
2936
2972
8011
2915
5712
9829
5747
12176
9971
8883
4884
9997
4938
10278
2987
2950
2995
5683
4967
4847
8460
5650
4577
4651
8066
2943
2962
4819
2919
4875
11923
5670
4905
2646
5729
2796
4703
3326
2965
4330
2959
11715
2949
2951
4677
4731
9831
2979
10316
2976
10289
8623
8991
4563
4605
4594
11035
4582
4574
4566
5820
10985
4539
4911
4550
11256
4558
9447
4677
4689
8001
11730
10115
3655
4103
3435
11075
8450
8555
8834
8831 8861
8605
10029
8510
1625
8080
2950
8801
4179
11543
1643
3268
10064
3308
3284
8570
2965
8695
4769
3287
10080
3735
4535
8061
10097
4611
11025
9442
2975
3923
4207
8722
8674
9051
8554
11928
9043
11753
4037
10085
4365
10342
3328
3849
11881
3109
4127
8748
4891
4233
4488
10225
11125
10144
4602
2988
9057
1665
4151
11834
4931
11253
10263
8051
3405
4751
9109
4515
3597
10961
2918
8772
11197
11839
11809
3271
10206
9170
10231
3563
10125
3623
10095
10191
10159 10178
9836
4485
3351
8718
4835
4963
3533
3607
3597
3567
3551
3509
3296
8110
5206
7934
3981
3081
8780
4009
9429
3412
8687
7817
8623
8108
8195
2915
3053
8775
4192
8715
2995
2759
4174
8048
4387
4415
8076
8785
4365
2986
4389
4634
9519
11220
4463
4439
9161
3508
8520
2875
2895
9409
4500
2809
2959
2909
7959
3309
11761 11829
12100
3127
4390
2991
2769
3625
2955
2939
2921
2783
2797
2903
2817
2837
2891
2871
2971
2764
3105
2968
2778
2790
2935
4372
4354
2731
2773
2793
8521
31313124
3151
3647
11550
11550
11550
11550
11550
11228
5250
5210
5190
5230
8010
5170
9379
9383
2850
9381
11434
7980
8020 8050
8899
2795
8390
10654
8735
8312
10644
8311
2151
5429
7960
2377
9905
5439
5470
10674
10684
8374
5419
11350
11420
11200
11200
11200
11200 11200
11200
11200 11200
2201
3712
3303
9445
7680
8109
4455
5449
8930 9060
8200
2383
8802
3409
5665
5460
8260
8640
8081
11860
8320 8989
9090
8292
5221
9038
8830
8855
5480
8920
8755
2389
8925
2410
8838
8237
7970
9401
5450
11920
8028
8840
2141
8835
8340
8579
11060
10867
8645
8784
8850
7910
8895
9046
8875
4720
8650
2131
5409
5440
8240
2121
8239
4497
9714
8419
5430
8855
5420
8905
8780
2111
8249
8830
5040
5471
8785
8720
8182
8810
8696
8909
8949
5695
82958323
8841 88778909 89598935
8811
8260
4141
2902
8171
2932
8131
8727
4181
9095
2790
8280
2846
755075207580
1615
7610
8860
8895
1539
8980
1570
11511
2818
9700
4255
9856
4275
8628
2811
4180
8750
8592
83008241
9485
9440
4580
4886
8251
8162
82338061
3890
3778
8619
2197
9530
8599
8281
8012
3610
8618
3862
10380
86438659
9902
8609
10823
8355
9620
9077
7831
4473
10059
8018
9427
8903
9417
9377
9407
9397
8866
11530
3736
4731
8838 8890
8200
10824
3834
11223
4555
2978
11079
2211
4404
9357
9606
10483
2984
5784
3756
8583
9330
11977
4421
8766
4187
2748
11588
4351
10174
8220
11053
3385
8032
11229
9593
4446
9441
5765
9066
8148
8540
4168
2739
7978
9079
4251
4460
11912
2770
1620
8024
5682
3806
4199
10950
4791
8120
9984
9480
11291
4265
5769
9745
2966
8680
4227
5688
9958
8206
1796
4575
5805
4759
9936
2992
2660
5802
2820
27952942
4068
4143
4937
4335
4155
2721
10032
4190
8738
9918
8690
7955
9302
10037
2855
11570
3899
11653
10057
8896
8014
8718
3918
8080
11610
11130
2753
10914
1326
2970
3947
11622
2805
3693
4545
8862
3373
1159210902
9322
9880
10997
3829
11091
10168
8123
8549
3549
8919
5038
8032
11649
3910
11150
8052
8033
3944
11769
616
8384
11628
11711
10011
3773
11693 11771
10069
11544
3890
11796
11888
4655
11647
11751
8258
4005
11703
9337
11862
10997
8716
10926
4709
10380
8290
3871
79517949
11787
8404
11797 11833
11671
11806
11609
8043
5068
10915
11815
4881
4995
11184
11120
10966
3074
9065
11732
10911
11326
10100
10938
11726
10978
10994
11126
11364
10220
10150
10138
11050
11106
10126
11286
11727
11679
11784
11762
11830
7990
5096
4083
11234
11256
3881
10030
10941
10073
10114
11212
11686
11704
11357
11686
10929
2751
11051
4044
11284
3857
8725
9867
11598
11680
9461
3850
8464
11736
2964
11766
2986
12114
11259 11333
3010
11320
3440
3490
3464
3263
4002
3030
4044
4028
9359
9033
3876
4719
5058
9858
4565
4418
5064
4442
4370
35824057
11306
4644
4466
5188
4394
11377
5067
4853
4971
8650
3081
7945
3415
4033
11520
3481
4076
11703
10212
10194
4805
5073
11018
5128
5238
5222
2952
3998
2944
8652
9885
8111
8567
3327
8242
9849
5168
11279
11681
9831
4212
2904
2940
5090
4671
5076
9233
5072
4236
11015
4020
4156
4138
5052
50485082
5086
11356
11316
4102
4120
2978
2972 2930
5085
5288
5279
5257
5308
5041
5073
5079
5067
505750495063
5264
8656
9317
5150
8655
8742
3250
11656
2990
11657 11820
8186
11060
9179
11307
8709
9224
8084
11326
11055
11541
8633
8428
11644
5337
11258
5042
11127
85708544 86688648
8620
8510
11240
8004
11227
11397
11199
7972
3330
3316
8643
8648
8402
8098
82828308
11320
5035
8364 2989
11179
12020
8728
3240
12072
12108
9287
5038
8914
89098891
8938 37408894
8939
9090
9055
9110
9089
9038 9130
91159165
9597
3276
8488
8657
12038
11910
11816
9150
4610
11120
3570
10390
10891
3012
4861
4943
4815
4979
4955
4827
3063
11646
1124711267
8298
8639
8685
3004
11888
11676
2994
5083
11792
5173
8515
5097
11794
8009
4336
11992
11681
11750
11772
12088
11857
8190
5043
11676
9198
3511
3084
11108
10919
10940
11033
9199
9397
11217
11205
8130
5079
3091
35103504
10865
5055
9133
8181
8603
9025
3360
11008
3348
5087
3291
12056
8580
4622
11306
2932
2916
2898
2866
2832
2814
9917
11334
3153
2915
10925
8511
5231
11079
8980
3664
3646
3686
3442
3624
3281
4676
3338
5203
9393
11220
5091
2929
9366
10240
5383
4668
8199
4654
10941
9260
11057
12122
5294
8056
12418
10917
11020
5061
547012136
8910
5291
12154
12172
12190
9369
10975
10961
2945
10949
9902
9901
8098
10929
3479
5403
5323
3217
3203
3308
3235
9905
12208
5310
544512167
9910
9077
11075
11074
11225
3253
5429
10376
12502
10902
10907
5366
9051
5388
3631
10906
9918
9240
9049
3390
12211
1120011212 11292
11230
11227
12023
12115
11072
3537
12300
9202
10920
8051
3673
1244612476
12288
12260
4698
12311
12187
8017
12195
11094
4690
12067
9913
12455
12371
10899
12432
220
3459
12312
3585
12383
12276
12404
12532
12324
12362
3380
8080 12337
3693
3520
12340
3524
12386
8085
3590
3394
8036
10390
10390
361736043603
3417
12425
12425
8027
2860
8038
12415
12445
11002
8111
11123
12435
12435
8034
8935
8945
8975
8925
8971 8985
8981
8931
8941
8673
8669
11750
11720
118201185011770
1179011810
862186258677
865786498665
11150
11840
86158687
8685
3060
8991
8951
8995
8953
Lake Elmo
Lake Jane
Eagle Point Lake
Lake DeMontreville
Lake Olson
Sunfish Lake
Horseshoe Lake
Downs Lake
Goose Lake
Rose Lake
Clear Lake
Armstrong Lake
Sources: Washington County & Metro GIS
7-11-2014
5
Official Zoning Map
Data Disclaimer:
This map is not a boundary survey
and is not intended to be used as such.
The City of Lake Elmo assumes no
liability for the completeness of this map
or responsibility for any associated direct,
indirect, or consequential damages that
may result from its use or misuse.
ZONING DISTRICTS
A
BP
C
CC
GB
LC
LC-PUD
LDR
MDR
OP
PF
R2-PUD
RE
RR
RS
RT
Shoreland District
Municipal Boundary
Proposed
10TH ST N
HUDSON BLVD
MA
N N IN
G
A
V
E
N
L A KE
EL
MO
AV
E
N
STILLWATER BLVD N
34TH ST N
50TH ST N
KE
AT
S AV
E N
15TH ST N
I NW
O
O D AV
E N
ID
E A L
AV
E N
20TH ST N
LAKE JANE TRL N
30TH ST N
53RD ST N
27TH ST N
JA
M A CA
AV
E N
55TH
S
T
N
JANE RD N
47TH ST N
DE
MO
N TR
E
VI
L
L E
T
R
L
N
57TH ST N
59TH ST N
5 1 S T S T S
31S T ST N
43RD ST N
L EG
I
O
N
AV
E N
39TH ST N
38TH ST N
4 2N D ST N
O
LSONLAKETRL
N
H
I
L
L
T
R
L
N
KI
M BR
O
A
V
E N
3 3R D S T N
2 4 TH ST N
26TH ST N
32ND ST N
JU L E P A V E N
H I D D E N B A Y T R L N
L IL
Y AV
E
N
CI M A R R O N
I V Y
A
V E N
5 8 T H S T N
H
I
L
L
T
O
P
A
V
E
N
21ST ST N
ST I LLW A TE R LN N
IRISAVE
N
M A N N I N G T R L N
45TH ST N
9TH ST N
IV
O
R
Y
AV
E N
12TH ST N
LA
V
E RN
E AV
E N
J A S M I N E A V E N
JE
W
ELAVEN
44TH ST N
56TH ST N
LEGION LNN
35TH ST N
KE
L VI
N
A
V
E
N
37TH ST N
36TH ST N
J A M A C A B L V D N
JA
M
L
E
Y
A
V
E
N
DEER P O N D T R L N
L
I
N
D
E
N
A
V
E
N
K
L
O
N
D
I
K
E
A
V
E
N
LINDEN
T
R
L
N
J
A
N
E
C
T
N
I M P E R I A L A V E N
55TH ST
ISLE AV E N
22ND ST N
U P P ER 33 RD S T N
4
0
T
H
S
T
N
T
A
P
E
S
T
R
Y
T
R
L
28TH ST N
K IR
K
W OO
D
AV
E N
16TH ST N
M A R Q U E S S T R L N
3RDSTRE E T PL N
H
Y
T
R
A
I
L
A
V
E
N
L IL
AC
L
N N
LISBON
CT
N
T A P E S T R Y
R D
J E R OM E A VE N
K
I
N
D
R
E
D
W
AY
1
4
T
H
S
T
N
HIGHL
A
N
D
S
T
R
L
N
E A G L E P OIN T B L V D
IVY CT N
J A N E C I R N
JONQUIL TRL N
I RO N WOOD
T
R
L
N
J AS
PE
R A V E N
W H I S T L I N G V A LLEYR
D
LA
Y
T
O
N
A
V
E
N
JAMACA CT N
I SLE
C T N
J A CK
PI
N
E T
R L N
JULEPCT N
B I R C H B A R K T R L N
LE
E
W
A
R
D
A
V
E
N
J
O
N
Q
U
IL
A
V
E
N
JA
N
E
R
O
A
V
E
N
L I SB
O
N
A VE
N
IR
I
S
H A
V
E N
LILAC PL N
I
R
I
S
H
C
T
N
TAPESTR
Y
H
L
H
I
G
H
L
A
N
D
S
C
T
N
IR
VI N C
T N
JUL
E P W A Y
M A RQUESS LN N
49TH ST N
WINDBREAK TRL N 44TH LN N
5 7 T H
S T
C I R N
I R VI
N C
I R N
BLUESTEM LN N
K
R
A
F
T
C
I
R
N
TAPESTR Y B N D
LILAC WAY N
IVORY CT
DE
E
R P O N D C
T N
L
A
N
G
L
Y
C
T
N
IN
NS
D
A LE
A V E N
11TH ST N
T A PESTRYGRV
1 0 TH
S
T
R
E
E T L
N
N
2
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
T
N
22ND CT N
L A Y TO
N
C T
N
1
0
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
T
N
L
A
V
E
R
N
E
C
T
N
WH I S T L I NG VA L LE Y T RL
IR
W
IN
A
V
E N
J
A
S
M
I
N
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
P
L
N
K
I
R
K
W
O
O
D
L
N
N
DEMONT
R
E
V
I
LLE TRAI
L
C
I
R
N
LITTLE BL UES T E M C I R N
MA
RQ
U
ES
S T RA
IL
C
T N
59TH STREET CT N
5 8 T H S
T C
T
N
30THSTREETCIRN
2 0 TH
S
T
R E ET
C
T
N
LEGION LN CIR N
IN
N S D AL
E A
V
E
N
10TH ST N
J O N Q U I L T R L N
53RD S T N
39TH ST N
K E A TS
A V E N
32ND ST N
HIGH
LA N DS TRL
N
21ST ST N
I
N
N
S
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
N
57T
H
S
T
N
STILLWATER BLVD N
LILYA
V
E
N
J A M AC
A A
V E
N
36TH ST N
I SL
E
A V E N
WHISTLING VALLEY RD
55TH ST N
37TH ST N
L A Y TO
N
AV
E
N
KE
AT
S AV
E
N
50TH ST N
34 T H S T N
L IL
Y AV
E N
LA
KE
E LM
O
AV
E N
3 5 T H ST N
I
R
O
N
W
O
O
D
T
R
L
N
59TH ST N
35TH S T N
L EG
I
O
N
AV
E N
J U L E P A V E N
M A N NI
N G A
V
E
N
K
E
A
T
S
A
V
E
N
28TH ST N
2525
1786
1515
1876
11455
10880
901
8281
8251
2298
4564
3501
5500
9941
10321
11455
10380
9130
9075
10105
456
10190
616
11530
11332
9524
5235
3150
11421
9579
2641
8280
8940
9109
901 820
9591
2500
8989
11490
8775
10386
9434
5193
2490
520
10112
11351
4670
8770
4452
10711
9200
11975
5275
10193
11980
4370
9140
3045
3855
54155435
10240
5825
1412
9940
8465
9070
11211
4212
11260
8866
2685
8555
9057
5200
4950
4890
9825
5295
5900
5699
10830
81558135
8989
12058
9765
5222
5250
3503
5761
11351
8650
1304
10550
5749
11260
3360
4890
5545
4755
10472
4890
4690
5255
4455
2450
3691
3870
9999
4620
5471
4596
8955
9255
3467
5135
5040
9200 9220
5190
8975
5429
8970
1069910579 107591063910519
8740
10231
4779
4525
928
872
814
760
704
10133
11330
8291
8268
3000
10755
10350
9696
12202
10732
10875
750
11491
11658
11050
10830
11311
11255
11514
10689
5220
3655
11817
11180
11165
4384
11347
9495
11240
9524
9585
9535
655
8243
11980
8400
11678
8243
781
5615
10120
8470
9447
9765
10824
11465
723
2901
855
10323
5416
8450
11989
8633
4424
9393
5414
2244
687
9440
8633
11790
921
2895
8006
3082
8141
9425
3681
8552
11144
11530
11459
5427
9242
5760
5300
5230
8420
5170
5110
9265
8271
975
5577
8530
4454
3536
5660
8430
5630
4375
4477
5050
5240
11580
5055
5272
8171
1532
8863
8810
11415
9345
2270
2767
5638
5080
8707
8042
4989
3036
5750
3077
11361
8737
8565
9155
1543
4550
9844
11530
10550
9759
9480
876
5247
9521
9498
3303
561
8519
9494
3733
10092
859
820
9605
8449
8080
812
790
755
873
8420
914
2678
8550
9800
832
483
3554
4201
577
8321
883
2906
747
3817
521
5014
8319
868
8411
2890
3560
11011
5257
3455
8394
2656
772
2813
697
772
617
820
785
854
968
724
858
881867
371
650 665
331
3812
418
887
875
488
568
605
877
974
429
871
770
220
694
829
5629
978
3505
84578367
585
9876
5673
10841
8879
5011
9250
3880
3520
9830
8281
2811
9605
2749
9260
5367 9655
8996
9389
5290
4415
2696
8028
9855
3548
5337
9380
5274
9636
9652
3280
8884
11825
9747
5715
8800
2580
5791
8255
9784
11676
3592
9571
3669
3663
5170
2269
9692
2618
8364
9580
9612
8620
8226
9393
9618
9965
9481
9873
9120
2528
2798
3793
2737
2760
8468
2119
3432
2677
9744
5277
11325
8284
9323
8241
3443
8120
8165
9395
9568
9163
10021
8382
3200
5611
9250
9343
8154
10015
8611
9386
8215
5424
2296
5855
9961
9400
3080
1535
9391
8414
9715
8151
8410
3435
9387
2699
9486
9798
9719
8454
8125
8180
2850
9768
9275
9710
4990
9251
989098349670 9940
9875
9543
9895
9179
9896
3424
9106
9805
2038
2769
9800
2841
3584
9314
8119
9073
8680
8134
5324
3033
2655
9455
9034
3572
1509
4026
9123
8074
8311
8340
8219
8047
8206
8271
9515
9576 9589
8260
8263
8276
9023
9945
9170
8335
8330
1521
9960
9855
8585
5307
8945
802
11343
11030
5771
4990
4910
9125
5385
4955
8010
5131
8727
10735
8170
9377
5833
1080
2835
9220
11550
11550
11550
5277
11991
8950
8881
5247
8717
5404
9320
8241
3407
2715
3408
8244
8247
8211
8388
3948
8401
4855
9355
9360
5710
5180
8500
8665
8234
8603
5270
2876
8880
5217
404
8490
5875
9906
2040
1304
5685
4768
2626
8367
9095
5412
5187
8375
5034
3825
8190
5110
4995
5217
10375
9280
2895
9280
5070
9302
10950
8810
2925
8060
2960
7760
8896
2525
5090
1199
2543
9333
8001
9363
3141
8230
2069
9203
5422
11674
5400
9018
5350
8820
5110
2816
5730
2224
1875
8790
5737
9581
8344
8478
7805
9243
8419
5445
11233
4860
3075
8301
2961
5730
1095
5757
5130
8254
5777
5025
7821
10774
7803
8341
8030
11048
2443
11295
8070
10376
2930
4940
4960
8310
5267
8225
8282
5230
9525
9303
5885
4880
4060
9295
8455
10819
5193
10903
10010
5745
11685
8485
9030
3060
11546
8800
9520
9078
8260
4405
5750
8030
8870
5150
1067
4850
5171
8409 8586
5690
4870
9385
10664
9287
8331
9250
10802
8351
2430
9400
10728
1025
2189
10833
8371
8110
5055
2393
11240
8391
8644
10847
4955
10746
4980
8268
2455
4865
5158
5120
4850
5072
2965
5150
1020
2470
5226
8352
1957
1140
1028
1080
2055
2450
2320
3473
9191
4854
2796
9517
8040
1019
8100
2935
1069
1115
8982
7990
1177
1145
1123
2856
8898
9160
5080
2621
8483
5124
2655
8867
9523
2450
8916
8965
1073
1027
8938
1093
9220
2410
3819
8962
2101
10922
5227
4596
2245
10875
5040
5060
8170
10963
5890
4515
84158139832183098171826183758229
83908370
10931
8320
5237
8572
5170
4960
8415
2461
9123
5747
10858
5211
8211
5701
9112
5020
8549
2333
10791
8980
5151
5790
10024
50557816
5420
8611
7761
2289
11171
11040
9055
4823
5487
5130
1696
9280
2225
11202
11345
7824
11108
5201
5410
8509
2470
8170
10071
8142
2267
5025
8292
275
5853
9498
10763
9682
4388
4926
3759
8167
7920
5750
5850
5770
5200
2227
5790
5171
10368
9706
8573
5500
3161
11047
8021
4346
2345
5810
4260
2491
10895
11063
8331
8011
3077
8001
8030
2440
5736
2479
2311
9901
2445
5171
4070
8180
5080
2395
9240
4009
11395
10072
9219
11355
9404
10830 10886
3047
1683
2175
11230
4275
11075
11150
8475
11075
11365
11190
8627
2935
9754
8140
5121
5043
4071
9098
11109
3765
3914
3797
5810
11320
8110
11115
4091
9757
11110
8080
5230
5960
5933
11350
11227
8690
8050
8050
3095
5235
11385
8509
2229
11066
11066
11375
1131411270
11140
11277
11320
11407
8989
5815
8470 8603
10825
4996
5920
8274
5151
3337
5459
5085
4748
5111
5830
9189
10380
9436
3065
5787
2750
9040
4732
8860
8330
8193
31509181
10079
8890
3476
3440
9032
9497
5065
8670
7730
7872
8350
5831
9986
8815
812580958065 8215815581858045
4171
5165
4061
8370
7840
5231
3100
3070
8265
9654
8390
7931
8000
2194
4855
5850
37203889
7856
4110
7832
9811
7982
11950
5261
5111
5321
5620
2315
9717
5091
5291
5693
3052
5870
2773
5775
3704
9550
8245
5724
4150
5260
2204
1446
9915
8567
8243
1985
2793
2340
2914
9615
4635
4100
2899
7818
5131
2380
5071
8510
8845
4966
9275
4140
5710
9402
4131
8875
5440
2337
2684
2700
4030
9954
7962
8203
2632
2041
2075
8687
5811
7864
8021
8809
10353
2662
7741
2329
4190
9634
8555
5361
2415
8625
7898
5451
5290
83508312
5460
8548
2360
8100
9861
8815
8309
2965
8270
2110
8360
4277
4280
4280
87498405
5480
8775
7848
4260
7740
5431
5051
2706
4276
8529
7780
4220
7930
5771
8040
5791
5751
5680
7808
2120
5655
5640
5730
7920
2958
5597
9229
9788
2672
4235
4033
2867
9676
8771
3929
2874
5675
1584
2718
8790
2933
1525
4240
2823
2390
2722
2174
9125
2359
2735
4255
9621
4070
9732
4285
9149
1849
9524
9799
18051827 1757
1529
2257
8247
9829
1627
1709
1535
2301
1684
1743
4215
1517
4120
1779
1727
1583
1513
8996
1681
1663
16971694
1668
17561636
1654
1680
9548
4111
4077
9766
1645
9730
9155
5010
9828
9350
1873
8780
4260
8770
1567
4240
9771
2134
9602
9796 9884
9737
3909
55355531
8539
9476
4944
3415
5819
9498
9885
9576
8121
8110
8085
8080 81968160
8173
4101
5093
8465
8290
9340
9927
8332
5701
2575
9611
8245
5418
5725
9141
9590
8498
9399
4118
9148
8556
3160
8511
11392
9437
3936
8120
8702
2931
5197
8416
8546
10977
8264
8164
9605
8517
5734
9601
9929
3023
4990
9957
10042
2819 2958
11280
11612
3351
8271
3286
3025
12460
4849
4348
9703
41328255
9662
9843
4305
9620
9799
4146
9726
9492
9605
9818
2923
4220
2955
3014
4964
8224
8286
11430
8294
4075
9915
3982
11658
4711
9985
4982
8804
5647
9768
4258
1589
2927
11443
1525
9819
8955
8961
97299650
5677
8282
10356
2939
8879 89298839 8969
8928 89688808
5658
2998
4508
8382
8012
8160
1668
4327
4345
4941
10325
5659
2805
2877
2769
5760
8344
3960
8455
11040
7851
5810
5711
9406
10149
4758
11328
4863
5782
2928
9186
8278
8536
8910
4167
9740
8533
11909
11051
4385
3078
11933
5840
11152
5671
2911
11880
11619
4633
11140
9949
9477
8431
4177
8015
4465
4092
9776
2907
8600
2932
11828
4589
2971
8528
4629
5736
1550
1594
1578
1650
1634
1571
4830
8320
1545
2936
2972
8011
2915
5712
9829
5747
12176
9971
8883
4884
9997
4938
10278
2987
2950
2995
5683
4967
4847
8460
5650
4577
4651
8066
2943
2962
4819
2919
4875
11923
5670
4905
2646
5729
2796
4703
3326
2965
4330
2959
11715
2949
2951
4677
4731
9831
2979
10316
2976
10289
8623
8991
4563
4605
4594
11035
4582
4574
4566
5820
10985
4539
4911
4550
11256
4558
9447
4677
4689
8001
11730
10115
3655
4103
3435
11075
8450
8555
8834
8831 8861
8605
10029
8510
1625
8080
2950
8801
4179
11543
1643
3268
10064
3308
3284
8570
2965
8695
4769
3287
10080
3735
4535
8061
10097
4611
11025
9442
2975
3923
4207
8722
8674
9051
8554
11928
9043
11753
4037
10085
4365
10342
3328
3849
11881
3109
4127
8748
4891
4233
4488
10225
11125
10144
4602
2988
9057
1665
4151
11834
4931
11253
10263
8051
3405
4751
9109
4515
3597
10961
2918
8772
11197
11839
11809
3271
10206
9170
10231
3563
10125
3623
10095
10191
10159 10178
9836
4485
3351
8718
4835
4963
3533
3607
3597
3567
3551
3509
3296
8110
5206
7934
3981
3081
8780
4009
9429
3412
8687
7817
8623
8108
8195
2915
3053
8775
4192
8715
2995
2759
4174
8048
4387
4415
8076
8785
4365
2986
4389
4634
9519
11220
4463
4439
9161
3508
8520
2875
2895
9409
4500
2809
2959
2909
7959
3309
11761 11829
12100
3127
4390
2991
2769
3625
2955
2939
2921
2783
2797
2903
2817
2837
2891
2871
2971
2764
3105
2968
2778
2790
2935
4372
4354
2731
2773
2793
8521
31313124
3151
3647
11550
11550
11550
11550
11550
11228
5250
5210
5190
5230
8010
5170
9379
9383
2850
9381
11434
7980
8020 8050
8899
2795
8390
10654
8735
8312
10644
8311
2151
5429
7960
2377
9905
5439
5470
10674
10684
8374
5419
11350
11420
11200
11200
11200
11200 11200
11200
11200 11200
2201
3712
3303
9445
7680
8109
4455
5449
8930 9060
8200
2383
8802
3409
5665
5460
8260
8640
8081
11860
8320 8989
9090
8292
5221
9038
8830
8855
5480
8920
8755
2389
8925
2410
8838
8237
7970
9401
5450
11920
8028
8840
2141
8835
8340
8579
11060
10867
8645
8784
8850
7910
8895
9046
8875
4720
8650
2131
5409
5440
8240
2121
8239
4497
9714
8419
5430
8855
5420
8905
8780
2111
8249
8830
5040
5471
8785
8720
8182
8810
8696
8909
8949
5695
82958323
8841 88778909 89598935
8811
8260
4141
2902
8171
2932
8131
8727
4181
9095
2790
8280
2846
755075207580
1615
7610
8860
8895
1539
8980
1570
11511
2818
9700
4255
9856
4275
8628
2811
4180
8750
8592
83008241
9485
9440
4580
4886
8251
8162
82338061
3890
3778
8619
2197
9530
8599
8281
8012
3610
8618
3862
10380
86438659
9902
8609
10823
8355
9620
9077
7831
4473
10059
8018
9427
8903
9417
9377
9407
9397
8866
11530
3736
4731
8838 8890
8200
10824
3834
11223
4555
2978
11079
2211
4404
9357
9606
10483
2984
5784
3756
8583
9330
11977
4421
8766
4187
2748
11588
4351
10174
8220
11053
3385
8032
11229
9593
4446
9441
5765
9066
8148
8540
4168
2739
7978
9079
4251
4460
11912
2770
1620
8024
5682
3806
4199
10950
4791
8120
9984
9480
11291
4265
5769
9745
2966
8680
4227
5688
9958
8206
1796
4575
5805
4759
9936
2992
2660
5802
2820
27952942
4068
4143
4937
4335
4155
2721
10032
4190
8738
9918
8690
7955
9302
10037
2855
11570
3899
11653
10057
8896
8014
8718
3918
8080
11610
11130
2753
10914
1326
2970
3947
11622
2805
3693
4545
8862
3373
1159210902
9322
9880
10997
3829
11091
10168
8123
8549
3549
8919
5038
8032
11649
3910
11150
8052
8033
3944
11769
616
8384
11628
11711
10011
3773
11693 11771
10069
11544
3890
11796
11888
4655
11647
11751
8258
4005
11703
9337
11862
10997
8716
10926
4709
10380
8290
3871
79517949
11787
8404
11797 11833
11671
11806
11609
8043
5068
10915
11815
4881
4995
11184
11120
10966
3074
9065
11732
10911
11326
10100
10938
11726
10978
10994
11126
11364
10220
10150
10138
11050
11106
10126
11286
11727
11679
11784
11762
11830
7990
5096
4083
11234
11256
3881
10030
10941
10073
10114
11212
11686
11704
11357
11686
10929
2751
11051
4044
11284
3857
8725
9867
11598
11680
9461
3850
8464
11736
2964
11766
2986
12114
11259 11333
3010
11320
3440
3490
3464
3263
4002
3030
4044
4028
9359
9033
3876
4719
5058
9858
4565
4418
5064
4442
4370
35824057
11306
4644
4466
5188
4394
11377
5067
4853
4971
8650
3081
7945
3415
4033
11520
3481
4076
11703
10212
10194
4805
5073
11018
5128
5238
5222
2952
3998
2944
8652
9885
8111
8567
3327
8242
9849
5168
11279
11681
9831
4212
2904
2940
5090
4671
5076
9233
5072
4236
11015
4020
4156
4138
5052
50485082
5086
11356
11316
4102
4120
2978
2972 2930
5085
5288
5279
5257
5308
5041
5073
5079
5067
505750495063
5264
8656
9317
5150
8655
8742
3250
11656
2990
11657 11820
8186
11060
9179
11307
8709
9224
8084
11326
11055
11541
8633
8428
11644
5337
11258
5042
11127
85708544 86688648
8620
8510
11240
8004
11227
11397
11199
7972
3330
3316
8643
8648
8402
8098
82828308
11320
5035
8364 2989
11179
12020
8728
3240
12072
12108
9287
5038
8914
89098891
8938 37408894
8939
9090
9055
9110
9089
9038 9130
91159165
9597
3276
8488
8657
12038
11910
11816
9150
4610
11120
3570
10390
10891
3012
4861
4943
4815
4979
4955
4827
3063
11646
1124711267
8298
8639
8685
3004
11888
11676
2994
5083
11792
5173
8515
5097
11794
8009
4336
11992
11681
11750
11772
12088
11857
8190
5043
11676
9198
3511
3084
11108
10919
10940
11033
9199
9397
11217
11205
8130
5079
3091
35103504
10865
5055
9133
8181
8603
9025
3360
11008
3348
5087
3291
12056
8580
4622
11306
2932
2916
2898
2866
2832
2814
9917
11334
3153
2915
10925
8511
5231
11079
8980
3664
3646
3686
3442
3624
3281
4676
3338
5203
9393
11220
5091
2929
9366
10240
5383
4668
8199
4654
10941
9260
11057
12122
5294
8056
12418
10917
11020
5061
547012136
8910
5291
12154
12172
12190
9369
10975
10961
2945
10949
9902
9901
8098
10929
3479
5403
5323
3217
3203
3308
3235
9905
12208
5310
544512167
9910
9077
11075
11074
11225
3253
5429
10376
12502
10902
10907
5366
9051
5388
3631
10906
9918
9240
9049
3390
12211
1120011212 11292
11230
11227
12023
12115
11072
3537
12300
9202
10920
8051
3673
1244612476
12288
12260
4698
12311
12187
8017
12195
11094
4690
12067
9913
12455
12371
10899
12432
220
3459
12312
3585
12383
12276
12404
12532
12324
12362
3380
8080 12337
3693
3520
12340
3524
12386
8085
3590
3394
8036
10390
10390
361736043603
3417
12425
12425
8027
2860
8038
12415
12445
11002
8111
11123
12435
12435
8034
8935
8945
8975
8925
8971 8985
8981
8931
8941
8673
8669
11750
11720
118201185011770
1179011810
862186258677
865786498665
11150
11840
86158687
8685
3060
8991
8951
8995
8953
Lake Elmo
Lake Jane
Eagle Point Lake
Lake DeMontreville
Lake Olson
Sunfish Lake
Horseshoe Lake
Downs Lake
Goose Lake
Rose Lake
Clear Lake
Armstrong Lake
Sources: Washington County & Metro GIS
2-26-2014
5
Official Zoning Map
Data Disclaimer:
This map is not a boundary survey
and is not intended to be used as such.
The City of Lake Elmo assumes no
liability for the completeness of this map
or responsibility for any associated direct,
indirect, or consequential damages that
may result from its use or misuse.
ZONING DISTRICTS
A
BP
C
CC
GB
LC
LC-PUD
LDR
MDR
OP
PF
R2-PUD
RE
RR
RS
RT
Shoreland District
Municipal Boundary