HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Minutes; 4-27-15Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-27-15
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of April 27, 2015
Chairman Dodson called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at
7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dodson, Kreimer, Larson, Dorschner and Fields
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Williams, Griffin and Haggard
STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Klatt and City Planner Johnson
Approve Agenda:
The agenda was amended to move the Village Preserve Final Plat before the freeway
sign code amendment.
Approve Minutes: April 13, 2015
M/S/P: Dorschner/Fields move to approve minutes as presented, Vote: 5-0, motion
carried unanimously.
Public Hearing: Final Plat and Final PUD Plans – Inwood PUD
Klatt began presentation by discussing the requested Zoning Map Amendment.
Klatt presented the phasing plan of the InWood Development. The first phase of the
development includes 40 lots located in the central portion of the site. In additio n, the
first phase includes the entire construction of 5 th Street from Inwood Ave. (CSAH 13) to
the Boulder Ponds development.
Klatt noted that the construction of the 10th street trail is not shown on the plans. He
noted that the developer and City would like to further discuss the location and design
of the 10th Street trail prior to completing the design work. With 5 subsequent phases
to the development anticipated, staff is comfortable that this improvement is not shown
at this time.
Klatt talked about the landscape plan changes.
Klatt moved on to discuss the critical issues, starting with the water tower site. He noted
that the co-applicant owns the site north of 10th Street, which is the proposed location
for the water tower. The City and the landowner are close to finalizing a purchase
2
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-27-15
agreement for the water tower site. The site has been surveyed and soil borings have
been taken to confirm that a water tower can be built on the site.
The next critical issue is the design and construction of 5 th Street. Klatt noted that the
curve into the Boulder Ponds development will include a reduced speed, while
maintaining a safe design. In addition, it will be necessary to vacate a small portion of
the Stonegate Park as part of dedicating the necessary right-of-way at the pinch point.
With regards to the parkland dedication and trails, Klatt noted that the buffer trail will
need to be field staked in order to determine the best alignment that reduces impacts
to existing trees and is closer to the Inwood development than the Stonegate
neighborhood. In addition, staff worked with the applicant to submit an updated
parkland dedication calculation. Upon review of the proposal, it was determined that
the applicant was 0.8 acres short. Staff is confident this can be addressed via fees in lieu
of land dedication as part of the developers agreement.
Related to Inwood Ave., Klatt shared that a traffic signal will be required at the
intersection of 5th Street and Inwood at some point in the future. Staff is recommending
that the applicant contribute to the City’s portion of the traffic signals when they need
to be constructed. In addition, the applicant must finalize plans for improvements to
Inwood Ave. as directed by Washington County.
Klatt noted that staff is recommending approval of the Final Plat and Final PUD Plan. He
then summarized the 12 recommended conditions of approval. Also, he presented the
draft findings for approval of the Inwood final Plat and Final PUD Plan. Klatt presented
the two recommended motions.
Kreimer asked about the location of the improvements, noting that phase 1 platting
does not include areas south of 5th Street. Klatt noted that this area is being platted as
an outlot, and utility connections will need to be made to Eagle Point Boulevard.
Kreimer asked about the timing of improvements in Eagle Point Blvd. given that the
Eagle Point will be reconstructed this year. Klatt and Johnson noted that these
construction activities will be coordinated between the private and public projects to
the best extent possible.
Kreimer asked about the number of units to be approved prior to water connection
being made down Inwood Avenue. Klatt noted the City has to ensure that the total
number of units approved does not exceed the water allowance provided by Oakdale
prior to the Inwood watermain extension being completed.
Dorschner asked about the timing of subdivision for lots around Street I. Klatt noted
that the street is being platted, but lots around that area are not.
3
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-27-15
Dodson asked about the utility easement down to Eagle Point Blvd, wondering if the
street will be constructed. Klatt noted that the street would be constructed as part of a
future phase.
Dorschner asked about 5th street connection to Inwood. Klatt explained that it remains
a condition of preliminary plat approval. He also noted that a County access p ermit is
required. Dorschner asked when the costs for the traffic signals would be recovered.
Klatt noted that the final trigger will be spelled out in the development contract.
Dodson asked about the street names. Klatt noted that the City Council is rev iewing the
City’s policy with street names. Staff needs further direction from the Council to ensure
that the proposed street names meet the Council’s expectations.
Dodson asked if any intersections in 5th Street would need signalization. Klatt shared
that certain intersections may warrant signals into the future, but staff is not
anticipating that these warrants will be met in the near term.
Kreimer asked about critical issue #2. Klatt noted that this issue is addressed in
Condition #10. Further details of the construction will be included in the developer’s
agreement.
Dorschner asked about the ownership of the retaining walls, noting that it is a specific
requirement described by the City Engineer. Dorschner recommended an additional
condition of approval that the retaining walls be owned and maintained by the HOA.
John Rask, Hans Hagen Homes, spoke about the berms and 10th Street trail. He noted
that the County is planning a regional trail to connect Oakdale to Lake Elmo Park
Reserve. Further study and planning needs to be completed on the part of the County,
but it is likely that this trail would be accommodated on the north side of 10 th Street.
Rask also addressed the platting of lots in the 4th cul-de-sac. He noted that it was a
function of breaking the construction up into clear breaks. Finally, regarding theming,
Rask noted that the uses near the 5th Street and Inwood Ave. intersection are not yet
known. The landowners feel that entry features can be better identified once uses are
identified. It should be noted that there are entry features at Street B and 5 th Street.
Dodson asked about the 15-foot separation between storm water pipes and structures.
Rask explained that there are drainage pipes in backyards with retaining walls and Klatt
also stated that the City Engineer is asking for easements to ensure that separation as
well.
Dodson asked about parkland dedication. Rask noted that the dedication requirement
is an educated guess at this point, because the future phases of the total deve lopment,
mainly high density residential and commercial uses, are still up in the air. Dodson asked
how the collection of parkland dedication occurs, either as a total figure or prorated
4
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-27-15
figure. Klatt noted that statute allows either approach, and parkland dedication is
finalized in developer’s agreement. Dodson asked about the phasing, Klatt responded.
Public Hearing opened at 8:15pm.
No one spoke.
No written correspondence was received.
Public Hearing closed at 8:16pm.
Dorschner suggested an additional condition of approval.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Kreimer, move to require that retaining walls within rear yard utility
easements be clearly documented and owned and maintained by the HOA, Vote: 5-0,
motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Dodson, move to recommend approval of the zoning map
amendment of Inwood based on the findings of fact listed in the staff report, Vote: 5-0,
motion carried unanimously
M/S/P: Dorschner/Larson, move to recommend approval of the Inwood Final Plat and
PUD Plan with the 13 conditions of approval as drafted by Staff based on the findings of
fact listed in the Staff Report, Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
Business Item: Village Preserve Final Plat
Johnson presented an overview of a request for approval of a final plat for Village
Preserve. Phase 1 will include 46 single family homes. He stated that the developer of
the project does own several parcels within the Village Planning Area and has decided to
proceed with development in the northern portions of the Village area prior to other
parcels. Johnson noted that the final plat eliminated 6 lots and therefore lowered the
overall project density somewhat from the preliminary plat.
Johnson reviewed the critical issues identified through the staff review, wh ich included
discharge of storm water to the north of the project site, completion of the Eastern
Village Trunk Sewer project, and other joint and external improvements necessary to
serve the development. Most of the critical issues are related to the completion of
broader development plans for the Village and are either under construction or going
through final plan review in conjunction with the Village Preserve final plat.
Johnson stated that Staff is recommending approval of the final plat with 11 cond itions
of approval. He reviewed the proposed conditions with the Commission, and indicated
that staff is recommending a modification to Condition #10 concerning the timing of the
regional public improvements to clarify the intent of the model home permit
allowances.
5
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-27-15
Johnson explained the park land dedication and how it relates to the other plats owned
by this developer.
Fields asked about agreement between Gonyea and Engstrom. Johnson explained that
the agreement is a private matter.
Kriemer asked if the street names are acceptable? Johnson stated that yes, they have
been previously reviewed and approved.
Dorschner asked about the timing of extension of sewer to Hamlet on Sunfish Lake;
does this help move this project forward. Johnson stated that the MPCA has extended
the deadline to 2017 or 2018, brings the sewer closer to this development. Dorschner
expressed that the sooner the development could be served, the better due to
environmental concerns.
Dorschner asked about the timing of project phase I. Dave Gonyea, intends to be
grading by June 1st.
The Commission asked general questions of the project developer concerning the timing
and process for constructing the public improvements.
Johnson reviewed the reasons for the extension of the trail into the property owned by
Engstrom Companies to the north.
M/S/P Dorschner/Dodson to amend condition number 10 to include “excluding model
home permits” Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
Condition 10 will now read: “All public improvements outside of the Village Preserve site
needed to serve the residential subdivision, including the Eastern trunk sewer and
facilities shared with the Wildflower at Lake Elmo, must be completed prior to the
issuance of building permits, with the exception of model home permits, in the Village
Preserve residential subdivision.
M/S/P: Dodson/Dorschner, move to add condition number 11 “all outlots containing
stormwater management facilities or public parkland shall be deeded to the City upon
recording of final plat.” Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Kreimer, move to recommend approval of the Village Preserve Final
Plat with the 11 conditions of approval as drafted by Staff and revised and based on the
findings of fact listed in the Staff Report, Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
Business Item: Zoning Text Amendment – Freeway Signs.
Johnson stated that the Planning Commission had tabled taking action on a request
from Rihm Kenworth to amend the Sign Ordinance to allow larger signs than currently
allowed along the I-94 corridor area. He stated that Staff has done some research on
design standards for signs from other communities and summarized the results of the
6
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-27-15
Staff findings. Johnson reviewed the example language that was included in the
Planning Commission meeting materials.
Johnson reviewed the changes to the ordinance that have been recommended by Staff
based on the review of sign design guidelines and other ordinances. Staff recommend s
approval of the zoning text amendment with modifications presented by Staff during
the meeting.
Fields requested that the language concerning the pylon covers be revised to clarify how
the sign may be covered. In particular, he suggested that the ordinance state s that the
pylon coverings must match the sign materials.
Dorschner asked for clarification concerning the separation requirements. General
discussion concerning the intent of the separation requirements. Recommended
revision to strike “or the furthest distance possible from another freeway sign”.
Kreimer asked if we had design standards from White Bear Lake Township as those are
the ones that were looked at for the last meeting. Johnson responded that they could
not find design standards for White Bear Lake Township. That must have been the
choice of the owner.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Dodson, move to approve the request to amend the Sign Ordinance
with changes discussed by Planning Commission. Vote: 5-0, motion carried
unanimously.
Updates and Concerns
Council Updates – April 21, 2015 Meeting
1. Zoning Map Amendment – Perfecting Amendment – approved.
2. Easton Village Developer Agreement – approved.
3. Sign Variance – 8515 Eagle Point Blvd – approved.
4. Boulder Ponds Zoning Map Amendment, Final plat and PUD – approved.
5. Boulder Ponds Developer Agreement – approved.
6. Municipal Consent – Phase II Downtown Street and Utility Project –
approved.
Staff Updates
1. Upcoming Meetings
a. May 11, 2015
b. May 27,2015
Commission Concerns
7
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-27-15
Dodson asked how bus rapid transit would affect the forecast numbers. The
Commission had a brief discussion regarding the bus rapid transit.
Meeting adjourned at 9:53 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Joan Ziertman
Planning Program Assistant