Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Minutes; 4-13-15Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-13-15 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2015 Chairman Dodson called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Williams, Dodson, Kreimer, Fields, Griffin, Haggard and Dorschner COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Larson STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Klatt and City Planner Johnson Approve Agenda: The agenda was accepted as presented. Approve Minutes: March 23, 2015 M/S/P: Williams/Kreimer, move to approve minutes as amended, Vote: 6-0, motion carried, with Fields not voting. Public Hearing: Sign Variance 8515 Eagle Point Boulevard Johnson explained that the City has received a request from BDH and Young on behalf of the Eagle Point Medical Center for a variance to allow a sign that is higher than allowed under the zoning ordinance. He stated that the request is to install a 16-foot high sign and that the zoning ordinance allows a maximum height of 12 feet for this type of sign. Johnson reviewed information concerning the site and the applicant’s statement concerning the justification for the variance. He specifically noted that elevation changes on the site and the location of a wider easement along the western property line limit the visibility of a sign that complies with the City’s height requirements for signs. Johnson reviewed draft findings of fact to support the granting of a variance with the Planning Commission. Staff finds that the 4 criteria required to grant the variance has been met. He noted that Washington County does not object to the granting of a variance. Haggard asked if there is any signage being placed on the building. Johnson stated that the City has issued a sign permit for building signage that is allowed under the zoning ordinance. 2 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-13-15 Dodson asked why construction had started on the sign in advance of the formal variance request. Johnson replied that the builder began construction based on the building permit approval prior to submitting a sign permit request. This problem was a result of a miscommunication between the architect, general contractor and subs. Patrick Giordana addressed the Commission and reviewed the reasons that the request has been made to the City. Public hearing opened at 7:28 p.m. No one spoke. Johnson stated that no written correspondence has been received. Public hearing closed at 7:28 p.m. Dodson indicated that he has driven by the sign and that it fits into the surround ing landscape and that one cannot tell that it is too high by driving by it. Williams asked for clarifications to certain findings of the Staff report, and asked to remove language concerning viewsheds. Williams asked that the word “marginally” be removed from finding number one. Kreimer noted that additional commercial properties will be located along Inwood Avenue. He also asked for clarification concerning the City’s electronic message board sign requirements. Johnson noted that the code allows electronic signs that are static and that do not change for 10 seconds or longer. Haggard expressed concern that approval of a variance would lead to other similar requests along Inwood Avenue in the future. Johnson stated that the wider easement along the west side is a unique circumstance of the Eagle Point Medical site, which would likely not be the case on properties to the north into the Inwood PUD development. M/S/P: Williams/Dorschner, move to approve the variance as presented based on the amended findings of fact listed in the staff report, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing: Zoning Text Amendment – Freeway Signs Johnson stated that the Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing on a request submitted by Rihm Kenworth to amend the City’s Sign Ordinance to allow pylon and freestanding signs with a maximum height of 25 feet and 250 sq/ft surface 3 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-13-15 area for properties within all commercial zoning districts abutting Interstate 94. The current zoning districts with frontages along I-94 include Business Park (BP), Commercial (C), and Rural Transitional (RT). Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a Zoning Text Amendment to allow freestanding signs with a maximum height of 25 feet and an area of 150 square feet on properties adjacent to interstate highways. Johnson reviewed the background information included in the Staff report, and noted that Staff received previous inquiries for larger signs along the I-94 corridor. He noted that the City’s previous sign ordinance included an allowance for larger signs that directly abutted the I-94 corridor right-of-way. This allowance was eliminated in 2013 as part of a larger ordinance update. Staff is recommended an ordinance amendment due in part to the expected requests that will continue to occur within the I-94 corridor. The proposed ordinance will align with the signage allowed in adjacent communities and with the previously adopted Lake Elmo sign ordinance. Johnson distributed a red-line version of the proposed sign ordinance update and reviewed the specific changes with the Planning Commission. Freeway signs are defined. The specifics such as number, size and location are also defined. The Staff recommendation does not exactly match the applicant’s request, but does include language that would allow the applicant to install a sign consistent with their general desire. Haggard asked if there was a limit to the number of freeway signs allowed under the proposed ordinance. Johnson noted that each individual parcel would be allowed to install one freeway sign. There was a general discussion concerning the application and interpretation of the proposed ordinance amendments. Williams noted that the relationship of the elevation between I-94 and the private properties along this corridor could be an issue. Johnson commented that the proposed ordinance does not address this issue directly. Dodson asked why 150 square feet was chosen as the limit. Johnson replied that this was a reasonable balance between the ordinance of nearby communities and previous sign ordinances adopted by the City of Lake Elmo. In response to an additional question, Johnson indicated that the current sign ordinance does include some general design requirements for signs. Griffin asked if the ordinance included a spacing requirement for freeway signs. Johnson stated that the draft ordinance does include this type of requirement. 4 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-13-15 Dan Dunn, Rihm Kenworth, provided general information concerning the business. He indicated that the proposed ordinance would work to achieve their signage objectives for the site. Public hearing opened at 8:11 p.m. No one spoke. There was no written correspondence received concerning this agenda item. Public hearing closed at 8:11 p.m. The Commission requested minor corrections to the draft ordinance as presented. There was a general discussion concerning whether or not the ordinance should apply to areas outside of the I-94 corridor. The Commission generally discussed how to address variations in the elevation between private properties and the road surface of I-94. Williams expressed concern that signs could be very high compared to the adjacent road elevation along certa in portions of the interstate. M/S/P: Williams/Dodson to table the proposed ordinance until Staff receives feedback from the City Council to see if they are receptive to design standards for freeway signs. In addition, City staff shall come back to the Planning Commission with recommendations for design standards for freeway signs. Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously as amended. Johnson stated that the Planning Commission does have the ability to recommend design standards without seeking Council authorization first. It was noted that the Commission is the recommending body and that it would not be a lot of work for staff . There was a general discussion concerning the appropriate process to develop design standards for freeway signs. M/S/P: Haggard/Griffin, move to eliminate the portion of the original motion that requires Staff to seek advance feedback from the City Council, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Haggard requested that Staff also research the aspect ratio of height to width to prevent anything odd to happen. Business Item: Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition Final Plat Klatt began his presentation by providing an overview of the site, highlighting the location of the residential subdivision. The application for Final Plat is for the 2 nd 5 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-13-15 addition of the Hunter’s Crossing Final Plat. The proposed plat includes plans for the 5th Street minor collector road. It should be noted that Lennar Homes is working on bringing a development forward on the parcel to the north. These developers will be able to collaborate on the construction of 5th Street. Moving on, Klatt showed a map of the 1st addition of Hunter’s Crossing. The first addition included 22 lots. The 2nd addition includes 29 lots, comprising the remaining lots in the Hunter’s Crossing subdivision. No additional phases of the subdivision would come forward after 2nd Addition. Klatt also noted that the water main project down Lake Elmo Ave. has been completed and sewer and water are available to the site. The zoning for the property is LDR – Urban Low Density. The lot sizes are above the minimum lot areas required under the LDR district. In terms of construction, Klatt noted that the site was mass graded with the 1 st phase of construction. No additional grading is necessary. The applicants have submitted updated landscape plans. In addition, the plans for 2nd addition include utility, street, stormwater and other supporting plans. Regarding critical issues, the most important topic pertaining to this development is the construction of 5th Street with Lennar, timing and phasing. The temporary access needs to be removed once 5th street is built. Another condition was that only 25 homes can be built if the temporary access is still being used. Dodson asked about the timing of 5th Street and the improvements to Lake Elmo Ave. Klatt noted that in order to construct 5th street and make access to Lake Elmo Ave., the applicant will need a permit from the County. In order to get a permit from the County for 5th Street, the developer will need to complete improvements to Lake Elmo Avenue. Haggard asked about timing. Klatt noted that the timing of the improvements are identified in the Developers Agreement. Klatt presented the recommended conditions of approval. Staff is recommending 9 conditions of approval. The conditions include making final edits to the landscape plans, submitting final fees in lieu of land dedication, and addressing final construction review comments from the City Engineer. Klatt also provided draft findings. He noted that Staff is recommending approval of the final plat subject to the re commended 9 conditions of approval. Williams asked about the condition of timing with regards to the completing of 5th Street. Klatt noted that the required improvement by the applicant is to build the southern half of the collector road. Again, staff is working with the applicant and property owner to the north to construct the collector road in one phase. 6 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-13-15 Williams asked about the tree replacement requirements. Klatt noted that the updated landscape plan addresses the required mitigation for tree repla cement as required by the City’s tree preservation ordinance. Williams asked about the size of the outlots needed to serve the exceptions parcels. Klatt noted that there is at least 50 feet, which meets the standard for a limited public street. Fields asked if parkland fees go into a dedicated fund for parkland acquisition and improvements. Klatt confirmed that this is correct. Kreimer asked about sewer service to the exception parcels. Klatt noted that there are not stubs to the exception parcels. Kreimer asked about the sales of homes in the Hunters Crossing development. The developer noted that 5 homes have been sold. Dorschner asked about the timing of the City accepting the public improvements and infrastructure. Klatt noted that the temporary access road will need to be closed upon the acceptance of the public improvements. Dorschner noted that the timing of closing the access to 5th Street should be explicit. Klatt noted that there is a condition of 25 permits to require the closing of the temporary access on Lake Elmo Ave. Dodson noted a discrepancy in the street names. Klatt stated that the Preliminary Plat was correct. Williams asked about the height for lights on residential streets and 5th street. There was a discussion about the need for street lights in residential neighborhoods. Haggard asked about the design of the street lights. Klatt described how the light fixtures were selected. He noted that the City does not run its own light utility. The lights will be owned and operated by Xcel energy and leased by the City. The developer is responsible to install those lights. Klatt also noted that the fixtures that were selected were based on the recommendations of the theming study completed by Damon Farber and Associates. Dodson asked if we had any external correspondence regarding the proposed development. Klatt noted that the City has corresponded with the County regarding the improvements and access to Lake Elmo Ave. Dodson asked about the maintenance of Outlot A. Klatt noted the HOA is responsible via a maintenance agreement. Williams asked about condition 8 with regards to the fee for parkl and dedication. Klatt explained that at Preliminary Plat, the parkland dedication amount was calculated. The 7 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-13-15 30 foot easement for trails was deducted from the amount. Klatt feels that it is adequate as written. M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to recommend approval of the Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition Final Plat with the 9 conditions of approval and updated draft findings identified in the staff report, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Updates and Concerns Council Updates – April 7, 2015 Meeting 1. None Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. April 27, 2015 b. May 11, 2015 2. Welcome to Commissioner Fields 3. Updates on Gateway Corridor Planning Process 4. Updated Population Forecasts from Met Council 5. Planning Commissioner Terms Commission Concerns Dodson would like to request more information for street lighting. He asked if street lights are necessary. There was a general discussion about street lights. Fields asked about the installation of fiber-optics and other private utilities. Staff will check with City Engineer. There has been some good coordination with the new developments. Dodson asked about requiring underground electric. Haggard requested an email from staff with the updated design for 5 th Street. Dodson asked about the amount of paperwork given to the Planning Commission for plats and if that could be cut down. Klatt stated that a lot of the paper is construction plans and might just be made available electronically. The Plat, grading and landscape plans will be included in packet. Meeting adjourned at 10:04 pm Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertman Planning Program Assistant