HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Agenda Packet - Part 2; 7.13.15BUSINESS ITEM 4B
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 7/13/15
AGENDA ITEM: 4B – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2015-21
ITEM: Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plans (Phase 1)
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a request to approve a final plat, final PUD
development plans, and related zoning map amendments associated with the first phase of the
Wildflower PUD development. The final plat includes 60 single family residential lots that will be
located within the western portion of the overall development area. Staff is recommending approval
of the request subject to compliance with the conditions listed in this report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Robert Engstrom Companies; 4801 West 81st Street, #101, Bloomington, MN
Property Owners: Robert Engstrom Companies; 4801 West 81st Street, #101, Bloomington, MN
Location: Part of Sections 12 and 13, Township 29 North, Range 21 West in Lake Elmo,
north of 39th Street, west of Lake Elmo Avenue, and south of the northern
Village Planning Area boundary line. PID Numbers 13.029.21.32.00001,
12.029.21.34.0001, 13.029.21.21.0001 and 12.029.21.43.0013.
Request: Application for Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan
approval for the first phase of a residential development to be named Wildflower.
The final plat includes 60 single-family residential lots, while the remainder of
the site will be platted as outlots for either public dedication, common open
space, or to be reserved for future development.
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Agriculture, Woods/Natural Vegetation, Wetlands, Open Space.
Current Zoning: RT – Rural Transitional.
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North – vacant/agricultural land, rural residential – RR zoning;
west – agricultural land (future Village residential) – A, RT, and
RR zoning; south – offices, business park land – C zoning; east
open space/Field of St. Croix II subdivision – RR and OP
zoning.
Comprehensive Plan: Village Medium Density Residential (3-4 units per acre)/Village Open
Space Overlay
2
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
History: The property was included in Village Planning Area boundary and municipal sewer
service area as defined in the 2013 Village Land Use Plan. The site has historically
been used for faming activities, including the growing of agricultural crops. A large
portion of the site is located in a FEMA Flood District. The City approved a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment last year that removed portions of the site from the
open space land category. The City also approved a PUD Concept Plan for the
property on June 17, 2014, and a preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plans on
April 7, 2015.
Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 7/2/15
60 Day Deadline – 9/1/15
Extension Letter Mailed – No
120 Day Deadline – 10/31/15
Applicable Regulations: Chapter 153 – Subdivision Regulations
Article 10 – Urban Residential Districts (MDR)
Article 16 – Planned Unit Development Regulations
§150.270 Storm Water, Erosion, and Sediment Control
REQUEST DETAILS
The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Robert Engstrom Companies for approval of a
final plat and final PUD plan associated with the first phase of the Wildflower Planned Unit
Development (PUD). The final plat will include the platting of 60 single-family residential lots, of
which 22 will be the “garden villa” homes while the remainder will be the general single family
homes located north of Wildflower Drive. The final plat includes the platting of a connection to the
existing Layton Avenue right-of-way that will be shared between the Wildflower development and
the adjacent Village Preserve single family neighborhood. As discussed during the concept and
preliminary plat review, the subdivision will include a large amount of open space that will be owned
and managed by the homeowner’s association along with a series of City-owned outlots that will
serve as storm water infiltration and retention areas.
Please note that the attached application materials provided by the applicant include the final plat,
final grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for the entire site, a set of supplemental plans that
provide a complete set of plans that have been updated from the preliminary plat, and utility and
street construction plans for the first phase public improvements. After an initial City review, the
developer submitted updated documents for all of the plans listed above with the exception of the
construction plans. The City Engineer will need to review a final set of construction plans as a
condition of approval. Due to the larger amount of materials already included in the packet, Staff is
not including the submitted construction plans with this report (these are available for viewing at City
Hall).
Since the City’s approval of a preliminary plat, the developer has begun grading the site under a
separate grading agreement with the City. The overall grading plans provided with the final plat
therefore reflect the work that is currently taking place on the property. The initial construction
access to the site has been provided via an existing private driveway from Highway 5, and this access
will be eliminated once the new road off of 39th Street is completed. The final plans do show a
driveway connection to the Richard Smith property north of Outlot G from the end of Blazingstar
Lane as platted in the first addition. A portion of the driveway will be located over what will be the
future extension of this road.
3
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
In advance of submitting an application for a final plat, the developer worked with the City and other
external agencies to address the conditions attached to the City’s approval of the preliminary plat.
The end result of this process are the plans that have been labeled “Final Plan Supplemental Plans”
that have been deemed compliant with the previous conditions of approval by the City. This includes
the revising of several streets to meet the City’s minimum requirements for width and other
modifications from the preliminary plans. There are a few minor issues that need to be addressed as
noted in the City Engineer’s review memorandum, but none significant enough that they cannot be
resolved through revisions to the final development plans or further review by the City Attorney.
Staff has provided an update concerning the preliminary plat conditions in the latter sections of this
report.
The applicant has submitted an updated plat and PUD development plan narrative and related
submissions to the City, including a concept park layout for the shared park with the Village Preserve
along with a lot profile sheet for the various types of lots that are planned. The overall project
follows the preliminary plat very closely, and any modifications have been made in order to address
the previous conditions of approval. Given the extensive reviews that have been performed on this
development to date, Staff is not going to provide a detailed overview of the project as part of this
report but would be happy to provide copies of any previous Staff reports on this matter upon
request.
The final plat and supplemental plans address other review comments as noted in the following
section of this report. As the applicant has worked to address the previous review comments and
conditions of approval, there have been some minor modifications to the configuration of some lots
within the subdivision to accommodate these revisions. These changes directly address preliminary
plat review comments, and more specifically respond to the following:
• All roads have been designed to meet the City’s minimum standards for width, both for
streets that will have parking and those that will not.
• All outlots that will be owned by the City, the developer for future subdivision, and by the
homeowner’s association are all clearly labeled on the plans.
• The plans now include a sanitary sewer service stub that extends roughly halfway through
Outlot H. This stub will be available for a future connection of sewer service to serve
existing development to the north and east.
• The cul-de-sac widths, street design, and any street corners have been designed to comply
with minimum City requirements and to accommodate emergency and public works vehicles.
The City’s subdivision ordinance establishes the procedure for obtaining final subdivision approval,
in which case a final plat may only be reviewed after the City takes action on a preliminary plat. As
long as the final plat is consistent with the preliminary approval, it must be approved by the City.
Please note that the City’s approval of the Wildflower Preliminary Plat and Plans did include a series
of conditions that must be met by the applicant, which are addressed in the “Review and Analysis”
section below. Because the application is for approval of a final PUD plan, the request does require a
public hearing to establish the final PUD zoning for the first phase of the development.
At this time, Staff is not recommended that the City establish a base zoning district for the
development area. The three developers that have agreed to build the needed sanitary sewer
connection south of the railroad tracks have yet to formally execute the required agreements to build
4
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
this line. Once these agreements have been executed, Staff will prepare the necessary map
amendments to support the proposed Wildflower development. One of the conditions of approval
notes that no permits (beyond model homes) may be issued until the new zoning for the area
becomes effective. Staff has previously recommended a base zoning of MDR – Medium Density
Residential for the residential portions of the subdivision and RR – rural residential for the open
space and natural preservation areas.
Staff has reviewed the final plat and found that it is consistent with the preliminary plat that was
approved by the City with the exceptions as noted below and as listed in the City Engineer’s report.
These exceptions can be addressed with the submission of revised final plans, and primarily relate to
details that need to be worked out before final approval of the construction plans. The City’s
Landscape Architect has previously reviewed the landscape plan, and his comments have been used
in the preparation of the final plan. Staff is recommending that the landscape plans be subject to final
review by a landscape architect to address any plan modifications that are necessitated by the City
Engineering comments. Although final construction plans still need to be reviewed and approved by
the City, it is expected that any required modification can be accommodated by the developer
without changing the final plat, and that these minor revisions may be made before the City releases
the final plat for recording.
PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES
The Wildflower development includes a request for a Planned Unit Development and some related
flexibility as permitted under this ordinance. In order to grant a PUD, an applicant is required to
demonstrate compliance with the City’s PUD applicant requirements and PUD Objectives. These
requirements and objectives were previously detailed with the applicants’ preliminary plan
submissions. For the most part, all portions of the development will be consistent with the zoning
requirements for the City’s MDR – Medium Density Residential Zoning District, with the exceptions
that were discussed during the concept and preliminary plan review and are summarized as follows:
Setback MDR Zoning District (Min.) Courtyard Homes (Min.)
Front Yard 25 feet 20 feet
Interior Side Yard 10 Feet Principal Structure
Side / 5 Feet Garage Side
Same or 7.5 both sides
Corner Side Yard 15 10
Rear Yard 20 feet 20 feet
Lot Area 7,000 square feet 5,865 square feet
Lot Depth N/A 100 feet
Lot Width 50 feet 50 feet
Street Widths City Standard Wildflower
Alley/Rear Access Not Allowed 18 feet
Cul-de-sac City Standard Prairie View Trail
Maximum Length 1,000 feet 1,300 feet
5
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
All other requirements for the City’s MDR zoning district will apply, including the allowed uses and
other site and development standards.
Please note that the above table does not include any modifications from the numbers originally
proposed by the developer. The purpose of this table is to document the minimum expectation for
lots and homes in the development, and is otherwise consistent with the development plans. Other
than the extended cul-de-sac length for Prairieview Trail, there have been no exceptions requested for
the single family homes outside of the courtyard home area.
The overall site plan for the property follows the adopted concept plan very closely, and the final plat
and plans are consistent with preliminary plat as well. The following is a general summary of the
subdivision design elements that have proposed as part of the Wildflower final plat and plans:
Zoning and Site Information:
• Existing Zoning: RT – Rural Development Transitional District
• Proposed Zoning: MDR – Lot Area; RR – Conservation/Buffer Areas
• Total Site Area: 119.28 acres
• Total Residential Units: 145 (78 single family, 67 courtyard homes)
60 with Final Plat (38 single family; 22 courtyard)
• Proposed Density (Net): 4.0 Units per acre (per developer)
Proposed Lot Dimensional Standards (Single Family Lots):
• Min. Lot Width: 80 ft.
• Lot Depth: 130 ft. (135 ft. typical)
• Lot Area: 8,000 sq. ft. (10,298 min.)
• Front Yard Setback: 25 ft.
• Side Yard Setback: 10 ft. living space; 5 ft. garage
• Rear Yard Setback: 20 ft.
Proposed Lot Dimensional Standards through Planned Unit Development Process (courtyard
homes):
• As listed above
Proposed Street Standards:
• Per development plans with modifications as requested by the City Engineer
Proposed Street Standards:
• ROW Width – Local 60 ft. (per Subdivision Ordinance)
• Street Widths – Local: 28 ft. (per City standard)
• Street Widths – Other: 24 ft. (two way with parking one side)
20 ft. (one way with parking)
18ft. (one way with no parking)
• Alley/Rear Access 18ft. (proposed PUD standard)
The standards listed above are all either in compliance with the applicable requirements from the
City’s zoning and subdivision regulations, or are consistent with requested modifications through the
proposed planned unit development (PUD). Based on Staff’s review of the Preliminary Plat and
Preliminary PUD Plan, the applicant has generally demonstrated compliance with the majority of the
applicable codes, and the requested modifications or flexibilities as allowed under the City’s PUD
6
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
Ordinance represent a reasonable request given the various design goals the applicant it trying to
achieve.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The preliminary plat and plans for Wildflower were approved with several conditions, which are
indicated below along with Staff’s comments on the status of each. Staff is recommending approval
of the final plat and plans with conditions intended to address the outstanding issues that will require
additional review and/or documentation. In order to assist the Planning Commission with its review,
Staff is also including a summary the critical issues that need to be resolved for the subdivision to
move forward.
Critical Issues Summary:
1) Conservation Easements. The developer is either proposing to implement new conservation
easements over the common open space areas within the development, or will be keeping in
place the conservation easements that were modified for Outlots J, I, and H. These new
easements will need to be drafted and submitted to the City for formal adoption for the new
areas, while the older easements must be formally executed and recorded one the final plat is
also recorder with the County. There are two issues that Staff is has identified with the
proposed or existing easements that must be subject to final review and approval by the City
Attorney, including the following:
a. One of the preliminary plat conditions requires that a “legally binding agreement to
prevent further residential or commercial development of all outlots planned for open
space or conservation uses” be established by the developer. The City Attorney will
need to review any proposed conservation easements for consistency with this
condition.
b. The City Engineer has requested clarification that any existing or proposed
conservation easements will not prohibit or impeded the City from installing and
maintaining the proposed public infrastructure (including storm water ponds, sanitary
sewer pipes, and storm water swales) over portions of these outlots. Staff is again
asking that the City Attorney review these easement documents to ensure that the
final language will not encumber the City in any manner.
2) Trail Construction and Easements. The developer has proposed an extensive system of
public trails throughout the development. Prior to acceptance of these trails for public use,
the developer will need to construct them to meet City specifications and will need to submit
easements granting public use of the trails to the City for approval. The developer is asking
that the proposed trail dedication and granting of conservation easement suffice for the park
land dedication requirements. Staff is asking to see the final calculations for land and trail
dedication in order to accurately account for the equivalent dedication that would have
otherwise been provided.
3) Platting of Adjacent Property. The final plat and development plans include improvements
that extend into the adjacent Village Preserve development, and specifically, portions of
Wildflower Drive, Prairieview Trail, and storm water improvements. Should the Village
Preserve Final Plat be recorded prior to Wildflower, this issue will no longer be relevant.
Should Engstrom Companies wish to record its plat prior to Village Preserve, the developer
will need to, at a minimum, secure the appropriate easements from the current land owner of
7
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
the Village Preserve (Gonyea) before the Wildflower final plat may be recorded. The
applicant has demonstrated that there is an agreement in place between both parties, and has
stated that this is a timing issue that will be satisfactorily resolved between the two
developers.
4) General Review Comments. All other recommended conditions of approval relate to final
details that must be addressed by the applicant and can be handled prior to release of the final
plat for recording.
In order to provide the Planning Commission with an update concerning the conditions associated
with the preliminary plat and plans for Wildflower, Staff has prepared the following:
Preliminary Plat Conditions – With Staff Update Comments (updated information in bold
italics):
1) No lots within a FEMA flood zone shall be approved as part of a final plat until such time that
the City’s Floodplain Management Map has been amended to remove these lots. As an
alternative to amending this map, the developer must provide documentation that all structures
will be built above the regulatory flood protection elevation, that any public infrastructure will
also meet Floodplain Ordinance requirements, and that the proposed storm water ponds may be
constructed within the floodplain area. Comments: This condition will apply to the final plat
and all subsequent stages. The Valley Branch Watershed District has indicated that it will
undertake a study to amend the FEMA flood delineations to lower the flood levels in this area
to match those identified in the Goetschel Pond study. There are no buildable lots depicted on
the final plat that are located in a flood district.
2) Prior to any grading activity, the developer shall submit to the City temporary grading easements
from the owner of the lots adjacent to Layton Avenue within the Brookman Addition in order to
construct the improvements within this right-of-way as documented in the preliminary
construction plans. Comments: These easements have been secured and grading has
commenced within this area.
3) The developer has requested the inclusion of public art within common areas and public property
throughout Wildflower development. Prior to the placement of any art on publicly owned
property or public rights-of-way, the developer and City shall enter into an agreement that
clarifies the individuals or entities responsible for maintenance, upkeep and removal of any
public art. No public art shall be lit in a manner that conflicts with the City’s Lighting
Ordinance. Comments: This is a condition that will apply to the future placement of public art
within the development. To date, the developer has not provided the City with a specific plan
or details concerning public art.
4) Prior to the submission of a final plat for any portion of the Wildflower PUD, the developer shall
work with the City to determine the appropriate park dedication calculations for the entire
development area. Comments: The developer is asking that the City accept the park land,
trail, and open space conservation (nature preserve) areas as meeting the spirit and intent of
the City’s park land dedication requirements. If the City were to assign a specific amount of
land dedication to the plat, the developer would be required to provide at least five acres of
parkland. Staff is asking that he developer provide a total calculation for the trail and other
park areas to help assess the specific trade-off between park land and common open space.
Staff is recommending that the developer not be required to dedicate any additional land, and
that the larger nature preserve account for any land dedication shortfall.
8
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
5) The applicant must enter into a separate grading agreement with the City prior to the
commencement of any grading activity in advance of final plat and plan approval. The City
Engineer shall review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat, and said plan
shall document extent of any proposed grading on the site. Comments: The applicant has
entered into a grading agreement with the City and grading work is presently occurring on the
site.
6) The utility construction plans shall be updated to incorporate the recommendations of the City
Engineer as described in a February 18, 2015 memorandum to the City concerning the
appropriate location and size of sewer services through the PUD planning area, including any
requested oversizing of these facilities to service adjacent properties, prior to the submission of a
final plat. Comments: The supplemental plans included in the final plat submission address
the previous review comments. The City Engineer must still review and approve the final,
detailed construction plans for the project.
7) The developer shall minimize the number of rain gardens within public rights-of-way consistent
with the review comments from the City Engineer. Any such storm water infiltration features
shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Comments: All rain gardens as
previously proposed have been eliminated from the plans.
8) The preliminary development plans must be revised to comply with City Street standards as
referenced in the City Engineer’s review memorandum dated February 18, 2015. Comments:
The plans have been updated to meet City standards.
9) The City approves all requests for flexibility from City Zoning and Subdivision requirements
with the exception of the street standards noted in the preceding condition. Comments: The
revised plans address this condition.
10) The applicant is encouraged to incorporate elements from the Lake Elmo Theming Study into the
open space areas within the subdivision. Comments: The final plans do not include any specific
references to the City’s theming study. This condition was not a mandatory requirement.
11) The preliminary landscape plan shall be updated to address the review comments from the City’s
landscape architecture consultant as noted in a review letter dated February 4, 2015. Comments:
The City’s consultant has reviewed the preliminary plans and offered comments that have
been incorporated into the final plans. Staff is recommending that a landscape architect
perform a final review and approval of these plans, and to specifically review any landscape
elements that are impacted by the final construction plan review.
12) All center median planting areas as depicted on the preliminary plat and plans shall be owned by
the City of Lake Elmo and maintained by the Homeowners Association. The applicant shall
enter into a maintenance agreement with the City that clarifies the individuals or entities
responsible for any landscaping installed in areas outside of land dedicated as public park, trails,
or open space on the final plat. Comments: The maintenance agreement will be incorporated
into the developer’s agreement.
13) The Final Plat and Plans must address the requested modifications outlined in the City Engineer’s
review memorandum dated February 18, 2015. Comments: The final plans have addressed
9
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
these comments except as noted by the City Engineer. A final review of the construction plans
is pending and is recommended as a condition of approval.
14) Prior to recording the Final Plat for any portion of the area shown in the Preliminary Plat, the
Developer shall enter into a Developers Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney that
delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of public improvements.
Comments: A developer’s agreement will be submitted to the City Council either with or
shortly after the final plat is approved.
15) The developer shall provide an easement over or dedicate in a separate outlot all trails to be
dedicated for public use. Any such trails shall be considered a park land dedication provide said
trails are constructed by the developer with other public improvements within the subdivision.
Comments: Staff is asking that the developer provide an overall calculation for the land to be
dedicated as trail easements or public park land. The developer must provide easements for
these trails in a manner that will be approved by the City Attorney. These easements must be
completed before the City will accept the any of the public improvements within Wildflower.
16) The City will not approve a final plat for any portion of Wildflower until such time that the City
has approved construction plans and received financial security related to the construction of the
public improvement project to connect the 39th Street Sewer to the 30th Street lift station.
Comments: The City has approved a development contract for the Eastern Village Trunk
Sewer project, and all parties are close to executing this agreement. Because Engstrom
Companies has been one of the three private parties that will be funding the trunk sewer
project, Staff is recommending that this condition be revised to state that no building permits
(including model homes) will be issues within Wildflower until such time that an executed and
funded development contract has been submitted to the City.
17) The developer must follow all the rules and regulations of the Wetland Conservation Act, and
adhere to the conditions of approval for the Valley Branch Watershed District Permit.
Comments: The developers plan have been reviewed and approved by the Watershed District
and grading work has commenced on this site in accordance with this permit.
18) The developer shall maintain access to the Smith property (11514 Stillwater Boulevard North)
during construction of the first development phase. Said access shall, at a minimum, be capable
of supporting emergency management vehicles and be consistent with City access driveway
standards. The existing driveway easement shall be vacated prior to the recording of the final
plat. Comments: The developer has been maintaining the existing private drive to the Smith
residence during the grading work. This condition will continue to apply to the development
until such time that the temporary connection to Blazingstar Lane is made. Upon the City’s
acceptance of the public improvements within Wildflower, the existing driveway access must
be eliminated.
19) The developer shall establish a legally binding agreement to prevent further residential or
commercial development of all outlots that are planned for open space or conservation uses
within the preliminary plat. Comments: The developer is proposing to place a conservation
easement over all open space outlots within the development. The City Attorney should review
any such easements for consistency with this condition.
10
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
Staff is recommending certain conditions that been specifically identified as part of the final plat
review, and that have not otherwise been addressed by the applicant, be addressed as part of the
Planning Commission’s recommendation to the City Council. The City Engineer’s review letter does
identify several issues that need to be addressed by the developer in order for the City to deem the
final plans complete. Of particular concern to the City Engineer is ensuring that the City has
adequate easements or right-of-way in place to support the proposed infrastructure. Staff is
recommending that two of the planned rights-of-way be extended (but not otherwise improved) in
order to address this matter.
Based on the above Staff report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the final plat and
final development plans for phase one with several conditions intended to address the outstanding
issues noted above and to further clarify the City’s expectations in order for the developer to proceed
with the recording of the final plat.
The recommended conditions are as follows:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1) The City Attorney shall review all proposed and existing conservation easements within the
development area to ensure these easements will not encumber the City from installing and
maintaining and the proposed public infrastructure (including storm water pons and related
improvements) over the City-owned outlots.
2) The developer shall provide easements for public access to all public trails and sidewalks that
are not otherwise constructed within a public right-of-way. Any such easements shall be
subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.
3) The developer shall dedicate additional right-of-way associated with the future extension of
Prairieview Trail to accommodate the planned storm water improvements include with the
first addition public improvements. This right-of-way shall extend to the westernmost limits
of Outlot F.
4) The developer shall dedicate additional right-of-way associated with the future extension of
Blazingstar Lane to accommodate the planned private driveway that will provide access to
the exception parcel located north of Outlot G. The developer shall provide any easements
necessary to ensure that this access may be accommodated once the plat has been recorded.
5) Final grading, drainage, and erosion control plans, sanitary and storm water management
plans, landscape plans, and street and utility construction plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to the recording of the Final Plat. All changes and
modifications to the plans requested by the City Engineer in a memorandum dated July 8,
2015 and any future reviews shall be incorporated into these documents before they are
approved.
6) All recommended conditions of approval as requested by the City Engineer in his July 8,
2015 comment letter shall be incorporated by reference into the City’s approval of the final
plat and PUD plans.
7) Prior to the execution of the Final Plat by City officials, the Developer shall enter into a
Developer’s Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney and approved by the City Council
11
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
that delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of the required
improvements for the Wildflower Final Plat and Final Development Plans with financial
guarantees therefore.
8) All easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works Department shall be
documented on the Final Plat prior to the execution of the final plat by City Officials.
9) A Common Interest Agreement concerning management of the common areas of Wildflower
and establishing a homeowner’s association shall be submitted in final form to the
Community Development Director before a building permit may be issued for any structure
within this subdivision. The applicant shall also enter into a maintenance agreement with the
City that clarifies the individuals or entities responsible for any landscaping installed in areas
outside of land dedicated as public park and open space on the final plat.
10) The developer is encouraged to incorporate elements from the Lake Elmo Theming Study
into the final design of the community mailboxes within Wildflower.
11) The applicant shall deed Outlots B, C, J, and K to the City upon recording of the final plat.
12) The final landscape plan shall be updated to address the review comments from the City’s
landscape architecture consultant.
DRAFT FINDINGS
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to
the proposed Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plans
• That all the requirements of City Code Section 153.07 related to the Final Plan and Final Plat
have been met by the Applicant.
• That the proposed Final Plat for Wildwood consists of the creation of 60 single-family
detached residential structures and an open space/nature conservation area.
• That the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plan is consistent with the Preliminary Plat
and Plans as approved by the City of Lake Elmo on April 7, 2014.
• That the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plan is consistent with the Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area.
• That the Wildflower Final Plat generally complies with the City’s Urban Medium Density
Residential zoning district, with the exceptions as noted in the approved Preliminary PUD
Plans.
• That the Wildflower Final Plat complies with all other applicable zoning requirements,
including the City’s landscaping, storm water, sediment and erosion control and other
ordinances, except as noted in this report or attachment thereof.
• That the Wildflower Final Plat complies with the City’s subdivision ordinance.
12
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
• That the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plan complies with the City’s Planned Unit
Development Ordinance.
• That the Wildflower Final Plat is consistent with the City’s engineering standards with the
exceptions noted by the City Engineer in his review comments to the City dated July 8, 2015
and as otherwise identified in future reviews.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Final Plat and Final
Development Plans for Wildflower with the 12 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff report.
Suggested motion:
“Move to recommend approval of the requested Zoning Map Amendment for the Wildflower
planned development based on the findings of fact listed in the Staff Report.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Form
2. Project Narrative
3. Contact Information
4. Developer Acknowledgements
5. Neighborhood Park Concept
6. Wildflower Lot Development Summary
7. City Engineer Review Comments – 7/8/15
8. Fire Chief Comments – 7/7/15
9. Final Plat
10. Final Plat Supplemental Plans
11. Final Grading Plans
12. Final Landscape Plans
SUGGESTED 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
PAGE 1 of 2
MEMORANDUM
Date: July 8, 2015
To: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director Re: Wildflower at Lake Elmo
From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer Phase 1 Final Plat Review
An engineering review has been completed for the revised Final Plat Supplemental Plans and Wildflower at Lake
Elmo 1st Addition Final Plat. The submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Pioneer
Engineering, Inc. and received on July 6, 2015:
Response memorandum dated July 2, 2015.
Final Plat Supplemental Plans dated July 2, 2015.
Revised Final Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plans dated July 2, 2015.
Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition Final Plat.
STATUS/FINDINGS: An engineering review has been separated for Final Plat conditional approval and Final
Construction Plan approval. Please see the following review comments relating to the Final Plat application.
FINAL PLAT – 1ST ADDITION
Final Plat approval must be contingent upon the Village Preserve Final Plat being recorded with
Washington County to ensure adequate R/W is platted for Prairieview Trail and Wildflower Drive. The
entire street R/W for Prairieview Trail and Wildflower Drive must be platted and recorded at the County,
or executed roadway and utility easements in the City’s standard easement form must be provided to the
City, prior to the start of street and utility construction.
A drainage and utility easement must be provided over Outlot O to accommodate the storm sewer pipe
proposed as part of the Phase 1 construction along Lots 3‐5 and 21‐23, Block 5.
Final Plat approval must be contingent upon a revised Final Plat that includes additional Prairieview R/W
(approx. 140 feet) to include the street R/W necessary to accommodate the Phase 1 storm sewer pipe
being constructed from Pond 3N to the Outlot C storm water pond (Pond 200).
As required, Outlots B, C, J and K are proposed to be dedicated to the City as part of the Plat.
Final Plat approval must be contingent upon Outlot J being dedicated to the City free from any and all
restrictions from third party easements to ensure that the City has no restrictions going forward in
regards to operation, maintenance and replacement of the storm water infrastructure.
Final Plat approval must be contingent upon the Outlot H drainage and utility easement being fully
available to the City for the ongoing ownership, maintenance and replacement of the City sanitary sewer
pipe, free from any restrictions by third party easements.
The Outlot A is shown as HOA owned with a drainage and utility easement over the Outlot. This easement
must be revised as a trail, drainage and utility easement.
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. 651.300.4283
PAGE 2 of 2
The Outlot F is shown as HOA owned with a drainage and utility easement over the Outlot. This easement
must be revised as a trail, drainage and utility easement.
The Outlot L is shown as HOA owned with a drainage and utility easement over the Outlot. This easement
must be revised as a sidewalk, drainage and utility easement.
The Final Plat must be contingent upon the completion of the Village East Trunk Sanitary Sewer from the
Reid Park Lift Station to the UPRR. The conditional approval should include provisions to not allow
building permits, including model homes, until construction of the Village East Trunk Sanitary Sewer from
the Reid Park Lift Station to the UPRR has commenced, a letter of credit to secure the construction is in
place, and a schedule for completion has been determined.
FINAL PLAT SUPPLEMENTAL PLANS: Final Plat approval must be contingent upon the Final Plat Supplemental
Plans being revised and resubmitted per the following review comments:
Revise Outlot H to include a blanket drainage and utility easement.
Revise Outlot A drainage and utility easement to include trail, drainage and utility easement.
Revise Outlot F drainage and utility easement to include trail, drainage and utility easement.
Revise Outlot L drainage and utility easement to include sidewalk, drainage and utility easement.
FINAL CONSTRUCTION PLANS
No construction, except for grading operations may occur on the site until the applicant has received City
Engineer approval for the final street and utility construction plans and has obtained all applicable permits
for the Subdivision.
The Final Plat shall not be recorded until final construction plan approval is granted.
Final construction plan review comments will be provided separately to assist the applicant with the
completion of Final Construction Plans.
“Proudly Serving Neighbors & Friends”
July 7, 2015
Review of the FINAL PLAT AND FINAL PUD PLAN – WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO
Following a review of the packet provided, I have concerns related to the following:
• February 13, 2015 – “Hydrant placement/spacing. Hydrants need to be placed at intersections to be
most advantageous for emergency response and spaced per our requirements, with spacing of hydrants
not to exceed 500’”.
There are still areas that do not meet our minimum requirement of hydrant spacing not to exceed 500’.
This spacing is measured via travel distance, (roadway) between hydrants. Please resubmit drawing
showing corrections.
• I also have concerns regarding the placement of hydrants along what is currently named
WILDFLOWER DRIVE. With hydrants located only on one side of the roadway, it may become
necessary for us to shut down this main access road when using these hydrants for fire suppression to the
north.
• Street naming to remain consistent with current program as adopted by City Council. This matter was
addressed in my review letter dated February 13, 2015 and based on the current drawings, this
development is not in compliance.
• I am concerned with the name of the development being “WILDFLOWER” as we already have a
WILDFLOWER SHORES development located on Hwy5 on the West end of Lake Elmo. As with our
previous discussion with Council regarding street naming and our goal of avoiding “confusion” for
emergency responders, the name similarity could create problems as well.
• This item was identified in February and I don’t know if it has been addressed?
I have concerns with the turning radius of islands shown, especially the “tear drop” design as this
presents problems for us getting several large apparatus into these areas, even more so in the winter.
• This item was identified in February and I don’t know if it has been addressed?
Road widths must comply with current standards. Narrow roads create problems for us. When there is a
structure fire we need to get several apparatus to the scene. There may be alternatives offered up such
as “one way” or “no parking”, which experience has shown us that these are easily disregarded and
when you factor in narrowing due to snowbanks, this creates difficulty in responding.
Sincerely,
Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT
Station #1
3510 Laverne Ave. No.
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
651-770-5006
________________________
Station #2
4259 Jamaca Ave. No.
Lake Elmo, MN. 55042
651-779-8882
________________________