Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-22-07 PZMti au or L.N.K E EL!10 City of Lake El 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 (651) 777-5510 Fax: (651) 777-9615 Www.LakeElmo.©rq NOTICE OF MEETING The City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission will conduct a meeting on Monday, January 22, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. AGENDA 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approve Agenda 3. Minutes a. November 13, 2006 b. December 11, 2006 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance to Lot Width — 3200 Lake Elmo Avenue 5. City Council Updates a. January 16 — WHISTLING VALLEY WEST request for concept redesign b. January 20 — Village Area Infrastructure Workshop, 9 a.m. c. January 23 — Village Area Financing, 6 p.m. d. February 1 — Joint Workshop City Council & Planning Commission 6. Adjourn APPROVED 2-26-07 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 22, 2007 Chairman Ptacek called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Lyzenga, Van Zandt, Roth, Fliflet, Armstrong, Schneider, Pelletier, and Deziel. STAFF PRESENT: Planner Gozola, Interim Administrator T. Bouthilet, Assistant Planner Matzek, and Recording Secretary Anez. Pledge of Allegiance Agenda M/S/P, Roth/Schneider to accept the Agenda as presented. Vote: 9:0 Minutes November 13, 2006 M/S/P, Pelletier/Van Zandt to accept the Minutes of November 13, 2006 as presented. Vote: 9:0. December 11, 2006 Commissioner Fliflet asked staff to review the tape. M/S/P, Fliflet/Van Zandt to table the Minutes of December 11, 2006 to allow the Recording Secretary an opportunity to search for a motion where the vote showed Commissioner Fliflet was the sole nay vote. Vote: 9:0. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance to Lot Width - 3200 Lake Elmo Avenue City Planner Gozola introduced the application for a variance to lot width at 3200 Lake Elmo Avenue in order to create a minor subdivision on the applicant's land. The general layout and lot sizes are met except for Parcel F which is narrower than the Shoreland District requirement of 150 feet. He said the existing driveway is twelve feet south of 32nd Street onto the arterial roadway of Lake Elmo Avenue, which is a concern. The more appropriate alignment would be to have the driveway access 32nd Street. He said the applicant provided documentation for septic systems on both lots. Utility and drainage easements would be required on the lot lines. Water service hookup should be required. There is no sewer available to the area at this time. Utilities must be located underground. Wetlands were not delineated for this application and there appear to be no wetlands within the buildable area but the applicants are encouraged to apply for a permit with VBWD. The Park Dedication Fee is $3,500.00 for one new lot. He said he could not find information about docks in the city code. The Planner distributed a Supplemental Report after further review of this application and additional files. Chairman Ptacek said Lake Elmo Avenue is still a county road and they have control of driveway access to it. City Planner Gozola said the applicants have received a permit for the new driveway but he spoke to the county this afternoon and they said they would go along with the city asking for elimination of the existing driveway. Planner Gozola said by code, the front yard of a corner lot is determined by the shortest length measured at the setback line. In this case, it would be the frontage along Lake Elmo Avenue. He suggested the applicants realign the proposed lot boundary, eliminating frontage on Lake Elmo Avenue. The existing driveway would then need to be moved. APPROVED 2-26-7 Planner Gozola said that his Supplemental Report discusses lot width also at the setback from the OHW of Lake Elmo. In 1986, this parcel was larger and the lot divided into the existing parcel and the. existing parcel to the west. At that time, this proposed subdivision was also included, but not approved. The proposed Parcel F on the 1986 plan was slightly narrower then that being proposed currently. The Council at that time anticipated this division and granted the variance to the other lot width for the applicant's first minor subdivision in 1986. Planner Gozola said staff recommends denial of the variance based on lack of hardship which would result in denial of the minor subdivision as well. Should the commission choose to recommend granting the variance, the Planner provided Findings similar to those in 1986 that would include that this is a pie -shaped lot. Conditions 1 and 2 would be required prior to council review. Condition 4 would be for standard easements, and the city would need legal descriptions for those easements prior to council review. The Planner explained the functional classifications of roads. Commissioner Schneider asked about the safety of the driveway's distance from 31st Street. The Planner said he relied upon the county's approval there for the new driveway. Commissioner Deziel asked about lot aspect ratios because this lot is long and narrow. The Planner said he did was not aware of those ratios, but would check into that. Carolyn Horttor, Applicant was assisted by her attorney, Anthony Dorland in reading from a prepared statement. They said this land was purchased by her father in 1964. Ms. Horttor's intention is for her children to live on the lake. Her sister subdivided in 1985 to live there and now she would like to as well. Ms. Horttor said that she and Joel Anez, Land Surveyor, met with former City Planner Chuck Dillerud and they reviewed the 1985 survey and they were told they met the street frontage and lot area. They were instructed to have a shared driveway and get soil tests. She said he told them to get a driveway permit from the County. Mr. Dillerud told her the minor subdivision could be handled administratively. The county reviewed the driveway. Dale Eklin did the soil tests. Ms. Horttor said she was surprised when Assistant Planner Matzek said her application was incomplete and she needed a variance. She said there are no drainage problems. They would like the existing driveway to remain shared between her and her mother, it would save costs and demolition of landscape. Because there is no ramp to the freeway on Lake Elmo Avenue, traffic from Highway 5 tends to stay north of 32nd Street. One more driveway will not significantly impact traffic volume. If you move the lot line the lot will look even more odd than it does now. One of the reasons for lot width and shape are so the houses are not crowded together. Mr. Dorland said the applicants have issued a compromise to their original proposal. The lot width at the proposed house location is about 150 feet wide and is therefore no crowding. This is not a narrow city lot. The intent is met on lot width. Nothing is really gained by cutting it even narrower at the northeast corner. They will not construct a building within 300 feet of Lake Elmo and 32nd Street North. He said he disagrees with staff about the interpretation of reasonable use of the existing property. The question is whether the proposed use is reasonable. Mr. Dorland said the applicants will agree to relocate the driveway to 32nd Street but still wish to keep the existing driveway as long as Ms. Smith owns the property. He said he thought the driveway must be 20 feet from the intersection, not 100. Mrs. Smith would like to utilize her APPROVED 2-2 -07 existing well because the water is fine. He said the applicants will agree to drainage and utility easements being created. Ms. Horttor said the well water is fine and it is very deep according to Dale Eklin. She said this lot will still have one of the widest widths on the lake. All utilities were buried in the 1960's. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:36 P.M. Matt Northrup Mr. Northrup said he lives to the west. He said he is in full support of allowing this variance to build on this property. He said there is some room for discussion on the adjoining lot line about possibly changing that line. He said the average width is 60 feet at the lakeshore and the applicants have 73 feet at the shore. Joel Anez, Land Surveyor, Landmark Surveying Mr. Anez said he worked in Lake Elmo from 1977 until 2003. He did the original survey in 1985 and today's survey. He said this plan is not looking at new raw land to be platted under current standards. He said this is the best use of the land. This neighborhood was platted in 1911. Easements along lot lines would be cumbersome and unnecessary for this type of minor subdivision. This lot is bigger than most in this area. He said the driveway has been used for almost 100 years without trouble, and there is hardly any traffic on 32nd Street. He said it probably would be better on 32nd Street but there are pillars, lights, and this is an old situation that precludes the relocation. He suggested the Park Dedication fee is too high for a lot of 1.5 acres where the applicants basically have their own park in the backyard. Constance Smith, Co -applicant and owner of the parent parcel Ms. Smith said the pillars are on either side of her entrance and bushes are trimmed in order to see in both directions from the driveway. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:41 P.M. Chairman Ptacek said the driveway is at the county's exclusive control. Commissioner Pelletier asked why lot width is 150 feet on lakes. Planner Gozola said lot width is for crowding and potentially overcrowding accesses onto the lake. Commissioner Fliflet asked whether the commission should consider the lot line adjoining the neighbor. Planner Gozola said that lot line is not a part of the application. Planner Gozola said we are looking at the result of a 1986 council decision which is the original subdivision from this parcel. The applicants ghost platted this lot at that time. The city council at the time allowed the width variance, which was a further deviation from the code than the one before the commission tonight. Their Findings said it was a pie shaped lot and the only variance was for lot width. The only difference from this subdivision is that the lakeshore side of the proposed lot was somewhat narrower than the one before us tonight. APPROVED -- Commissioner Deziel asked whether 150 feet of lot width at OHW setback is part of the city code for the Shoreland Overlay District. The city has not allowed platting variances for that variance. He asked if there is another way to do this that would make it less non -conforming or can an easement for the lake be granted. Perhaps there could be a different design with enough lake frontage. Joel Anez Mr. Anez reminded the commission of the neighborhood to the west. This area was platted in 1911. He said this lot width and size conforms to that neighborhood. Chairman Ptacek said if Neighborhood Conservation Zoning was in place right now, the city probably would not even be here for a variance. The City does not have that district currently established. Commissioner Fliflet said the recommendation to move the driveway to 32nd Street would not be a safer access because of traffic coming in from Lake Elmo Avenue. Relocating the driveways should be removed from the conditions. Commissioner Deziel said the applicants are not creating something for two people. They are making lots for the future. Planner Gozola said if the application is approved, approval becomes a mechanism for removing one of the driveways. Commissioner Roth said the lot width is what should be discussed because the driveway has nothing to do with it. Commissioner Pelletier said she empathizes but her problem is the lot is incredibly skinny. Commissioner Armstrong said the front yard setback variance could be eliminated by realigning the lot line to widen the portion along Lake Elmo Avenue. He said he sees no problem with the lake and there is precedent for it. Planner Gozola said he would prefer the driveway access onto 32nd Street. Commissioner Armstrong said that in a perfect world the city would not allow it, but we have to deal with the cards we are dealt. The driveway has been there a long time. Washington County will allow another driveway to the south. He said it is a conforming use and he does not wish to compel the applicants to abandon it. Parcel G should build the driveway along with construction of the new septic system. He said his condition would be that they put that new driveway onto Parcel G when they do the septic system as planned in the Summer 2007. He sees no problem with OHW. He suggested the applicants can make a better effort to eliminate the variance at street side. Mr. Dorland said the time table is 120 days for subdivision approval. Carolyn Horttor said the driveway permit lasts one year but it can be extended. M/S/P, Armstrong/Roth to table the application for a variance and minor subdivision for an additional sixty days at the request of the applicant. Vote: 9:0. APPROVED 2-26-07 The Planner said the application will be brought back at a future meeting. M/S/P, Deziel/Fliflet to take a straw poll about whether to have driveway access moved to 32nd Street. Vote: 9:0. In the straw poll to relocate the driveway to 32nd Street, two commissioners (Lyzenga, Deziel) voted to relocate it and six voted to leave it alone. Met Council Extension Update The Assistant Planner said the Metropolitan Council approved the request for an extension for turning in the updated zoning code. The extension expires on July 12, 2007. Staff will work on a timeline. The city will submit monthly reports. M/S/P, Ptacek/Van Zandt to direct staff to bring a timeline for zoning to the next meeting. Vote: 9:0. System Statement Special Projects Director Hoyt could not attend tonight. Planner Gozola expressed concerns about the Systems Statement and the Met Council is reviewing them. Second Joint Workshop with City Council Assistant Planner Matzek said the first workshop was February 1 and the second workshop was scheduled for February 8. Only three commissioners could attend on February 8 so staff will look at other options. Planner Gozola asked the commissioners bring calendars to the February 1st workshop. Work Plan Discussion Assistant Planner Matzek asked the commissioners to look at the 2006 Work Plan to make decisions for 2007. Chairman Ptacek asked for the "to do later" list for the code and incorporate those onto the possible work plan. He said that hopefully those will be in the timeline. City Council Updates The City Council tabled Whistling Valley West expressing many of the same concerns as the Planning Commission. Village Area Infrastructure Workshop Assistant Planner Matzek said the first of two Village Area Workshops was conducted in regard to sewer lines, surface water, water lines and streets in the city for costs and locations. The Village Area Financing Workshop will take place tomorrow night at 6 p.m. The Joint Workshop with the City Council will take place on February 1, 2006. Adjourned at 8:26 p.m. Respectfully submitted, //44! Kimberly Ane Recording Secretary