Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.27.16 Planning Commission Packet 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 June 27, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. AGENDA 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approve Agenda 3. Approve Minutes a. June 13, 2016 4. Public Hearings a. CONCEPT PUD PLANS: Meijer Stores Limited Partnership is requesting review and approval of a PUD Concept Plan for a future Meijer Store, gas station and future commercial outlots to be located on a 54.69 acre site near the northeast corner of Keats Ave and Hudson Boulevard. 5. Business Items a. OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE: The Planning Commission is being asked to review an updated version of the Open Space Preservation ordinance after incorporating feedback from the City Council. b. TEMPORARY FAMILY HEALTH CARE DWELLING: The Planning Commission should consider recommending adoption of an ordinance to opt out or adopt regulations that would regulate temporary family health care dwellings. 6. Updates a. City Council Updates – June 21, 2016 Meeting i. Accessory Structure Ordinance (Fish House) – ii. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow sewer connection for RS zoning - b. Staff Updates i. Upcoming Meetings:  July 11, 2016  July 25, 2016 c. Commission Concerns 7. Adjourn 2 ***Note: The Public is advised that there may be a quorum of City Council Members in attendance as observers. No official action can or will be taken by the City Council at this meeting. ***Note: Every effort will be made to accommodate person or persons that need special considerations to attend this meeting due to a health condition or disability. Please contact the Lake Elmo City Clerk if you are in need of special accommodations. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 13, 2016 Chairman Williams called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dunn, Fields, Larson, Griffin, Dodson, and Williams. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Haggard, Kreimer, & Lundquist STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Wensman & City Planner Becker Approve Agenda: Agenda is approved as presented. Approve Minutes: June 23, 2016 M/S/P:Dunn/Fields, move to approve the June 23, 2016 minutes as amended, Vote: 4-0, motion carried with Griffin and Dodson not voting. Public Hearing – Easement Vacation 8574 Eagle Point circle Becker started her presentation regarding the easements related to Auto Owners water mains and hydrants. The city moved the location of the water mains and hydrants, so new easements were recorded. Auto Owners is requesting the old easments be vacated. Public hearing opened at 7:07 pm No one spoke There was written comment from Machine Shed, but once the application was explained to them, they were fine with the item. Public hearing closed at 7:08 pm Dunn stated it was straight forward and she has no issue with it. M/S/P: Dunn/Griffin, move to recommend approval of the request to vacate the easement as outlined in Exhibit B-2/2138129 Water Main Easement as recorded, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimoulsy. 2 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 Public Hearing – Zoning Text Amendment – To amend the fencing regulations to allow administrative approval of encroachment agreements. Becker stated that the current code the way it is written requires any easement encroachment agreement be approved by the City Council. This change would allow for those agreements to be approved administratively by staff. The current process is time consuming for staff as well as the resident and delays the issuing of the permit. The fee for this agreement is $150.00, making a fence permit $225.00. In the future, we might be able to reduce the fee with the reduced staff time. Dunn is wondering why this was added in 2011 and how often this happens. Becker stated that it has happened quite a bit since she has been here. The new developments all have the utility easements located on the properties. Larson asked what happens if there is conflicting rules between the City and the HOA. Becker stated that this change doesn’t in effect change any of the rules other than who is allowed to make the approval. Wensman stated that the City does not regulate HOA covenants between property owners. Public hearing opened at 7:20 pm No one spoke and there was no written comments received. Public hearing closed at 7:21 pm M/S/: Fields/Dunn, would like to add a sentence at the end of the suggested motion to read that the fee be reduced to $50 when the city Council considers the fee schedule. M/S/P: Williams/Dunn, would like to make an amendment to the motion that the fee not be specified, but only that it be reduced. Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Oringinal motion as amended to add “that the fee be reduced when the City Council considers the fee schedule”, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Dodson/Griffin, move to recommend approval of an ordinance to amend Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Section 205: Fencing Regulation; Subp. (D) (6) to allow approval of a fence easement encroachment agreement by the Planning Director or his/her designee after review and approval and furthermore recommends that the fee be reduced when the City Council considers the fee schedule, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. 3 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 Public Hearing – Zoning Text Amendment – To amend the accessory Structure Regulations Becker stated that staff is bringing forward 3 suggested changes to the accessory structure ordinance. The first is to exempt fish houses to the requirement that a primary structure not be required prior to a fish house being located on the lot. The second is removing the portion of the code that allows an accessory structure to be located closer to the front lot line by resolution. Staff would like this removed because it is essentially granting a variance without the requirement to go through the variance process. The third change is to change the size of a tool shed from a maximum of 160 square feet to 200 square feet and move that to the exempted section with one being allowed on a residential lot. Dodson is wondering why a fishhouse would be any different than something like a camper trailer. Wensman stated that the concern was that there would be storage on vacant lots if there are not specific standards. Williams was wondering if the tool shed size is calculated into the overall size of accessory structure. Becker stated that no it would not be included for size or number. Dodson thinks it might be beneficial to have the 120 square feet in the definition. Becker stated that there are fish houses that are larger. The size limit only applies if there is no primary structure. Public hearing opened at 7:47 pm No one spoke and there was no written comments received. Public hearing closed at 7:48 pm Williams is not in favor of exempting the tool shed from size and number in all districts and thinks it should adhere to the limitations of the district. Wensman stated that if that is the direction the Planning Commission wants to go, there should be some language added in the old “F” and would specify one. M/S/P: Williams/Fields, move to change the wording of the definition for storage or tool sheds to be: Storage or Tool sheds: One storage or tool shed as defined in this section may be placed on any lot in addition to the permited number of accessory buildings, provided it complies with the maximum area requirements of the zoning district, providing a principal structure exists on the lot. Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Williams is wondering about separate lots of record owned by the person who lives next door. This might open up the door for someone to have a fishhouse on both lots. 4 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 Becker stated as it is written, that could happen. Williams is uncomfortable with this possibility because it could create a lot of clutter for the neighbors. Dodson thinks that this seems like a really small problem and that there is n ot a lot of lots this would pertain to. Dodson wants the 3 proposals to be separate motions. Williams would like to separate out the fishhouse portion and know how many parcels this would apply to. M/S/P:Dodson/Williams, Move to recommend approval of Ordinance 08- the exception to 154.406, subd D, and the definition of “storage or tool shed” as amended, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Becker stated that there is roughly 50 parcels that are adjacent to the lake and could potentially put a fishhouse on the lot without a primary structure. Fields is comfortable with the language written as this is not a permanent structure. M/S/P:Williams/Dodson, move to recommend the following finding of fact that there is some concern that if every one of these lots had a fishhouse, it may lead to complaints by the neighbors. Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Dunn/Griffin, Move to recommend approval of the accessory structure ordinance as it pertains to fishhouses as amended, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing – Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to allow connection to sanitary sewer in Rural Single Family zoning where practical. Wensman stated that the Met Council suggested that we amend the definition of the rural single family definition in the Comprehensive Plan so that it would allow connections to sanitary sewer where reasonable. Dodson would like it to also read to municipal water where practical. Wensman stated that we are really just talking about areas in the MUSA and the water system extends outside the MUSA. Williams is wondering about the term practical. Wensman stated that it was what was suggested by Lisa Barajas at the Met Council. Williams asked what if the resident did not want to connect. Wensman stated that the connection would be determined by the City Council. Dunn would like the “when practical” changed to “when requested”, which gives the resident much more control. Wensman stated that the MUSA dictates where the sewer can go, but this basically allows for Rural Single Family to connect. 5 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 Public hearing opened at 8:34 pm No one spoke and there was no written comments received. Public hearing closed at 8:35 pm Dunn would like to see the option of sewer or private septic. She doesn’t think that they should be forced to connect to sewer. Wensman stated that the comprehensive Plan is not in compliance with the projects that we are doing. If we don’t do this amendment, the land use designation would need to be changed. M/S/P: Fields/Dodson, Move to recommend the City Council approve the comprehensive plan text amendment to amend the planned land use category in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan to read as written, Vote: 5-1, motion carried. Dunn voted no because she feels it is important that people have an option regarding connection. Business Item – Zoning Text Amendment to discuss the VMX Zoning Text . Wensman began his presentation by showing the areas that are zoned as general business, but guided as VMX in the Comprehensive Plan. To bring the zoning into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, Wensman would like to see these properties rezoned. Wensman believes by rezoning, it would actually eliminate some non conformities. The area that would change the most, would be in the Northern area by 39th Street. Wensman stated that this was intended to bring the district more in conformance than it is now and should be done as a district vs. one at a time. If there are things about the district that the Commission does not like, then changes should be made to the district. Dunn feels that the premise is based on the Village Master Plan. Where is the master plan? Wensman stated that the plan was based on transfer of density and he is not sure what happened to that plan. Dunn did a rough calculation on what could be done if the maximum densities were used. With her calculation, there is potential for upwards of 3000 people. She feels it is quite intense without a lot of restrictions. She would like to see more work done on the reductions for the comprehensive plan and possibly look at form based code. She thinks we should take our time and do this r ight. Dunn pointed out some of the differences between GB and VMX. She feels one of the biggest differences is the impervious surface coverage maximum goes from 40% based on acreage in GB to 75% in VMX. Fields is confused because if the comprehensive plan is guided the way we want it, the rezoning should happen. If we are considering if the guiding is correct, then it should not be rezoned, but should be discussed what the guiding should be. 6 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 Larson thinks that what brings the guiding for VMX into question is that the density of this area is in transition. Larson understands the feeling of discomfort as this zone is less restrictive. There are still a lot of questions that make it uncomfortable for peo ple to buy into this zone. Williams thinks it would be good to ask the City Council if past projections of population in this area are still valid. Dodson is wondering how big a project form based code is. Wensman stated that it is something that takes some technical skill to do and it would need to be contracted out. Williams thinks it would help facilitate the vision, but would not be necessary to do the rezone. M/:Dunn/, Move to recommend not rezoning the parcels to VMX until the City Council can review the target numbers and there is a form based code, motion dies for lack of second. M/S/P: Williams/Dunn, Move to ask the City Council to give the Planning Commission guidance on updated population and development projections for the area s guided for VMX in the Old Village, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Fields would like to know what the driving force was for the VMX. If it was to bring more people to the downtown to make it more vibrant, or if it was to meet the Met Council mandates for housing population. Williams recollection was that it was for both of those reasons in addition to form based code to make it a more picturesque downtown and to incorporate business and residential in the same building, which general business does not do. M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, Move to ask the City Council to approve funds for a consultant to work on a form based code for the downtown Old Village, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Fields would like any information that he could get on form based code. Williams believes that the City has a couple of videos on this topic. Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. June 27, 2016 b. July 11, 2016 Commission Concerns 7 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 Dunn asked about the AUAR. Wensman stated that the City is overdue for the update and it is in the City Engineers hands right now. Meeting adjourned at 9:28 pm Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertman Planning Program Assistant PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 6/27/2016 AGENDA ITEM: 4A – PUBLIC HEARING CASE # 2016-21 ITEM: Meijer Store PUD Concept Plan SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director REVIEWED BY: Emily Becker, City Planner Jack Griffin, Focus Engineering SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Meijer Stores Limited Partnership is requesting review and approval of their PUD Concept Plan for a future Meijer Store, gas station and future commercial outlots to be located on a 54.69 acre site near the northeast corner of Keats Avenue and Hudson Boulevard. GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Meijer Stores Limited Partnership Property Owners: Durow Family Lake Elmo Property, LLC. Location: Keats Avenue and Hudson Boulevard. Request: PUD Concept Plan approval Existing Land Use and Zoning: Agricultural Land Use/ RT – Rural Transitional Zoning Comprehensive Plan: Commercial/Medium Density Residential and in the Phase III of the Regional Sewer Staging Plan. History: The property is guided in the City’s Comprehensive Plan for Commercial and Medium Density Residential development in the Phase III of the Regional Sewer Staging Plan. Deadline for Action: Application Complete – June 1, 2016 60 Day Deadline – July 30, 2016 Extension Letter Mailed – 120 Day Deadline – Applicable Regulations: Article XVI – Planned Unit Development Regulations Article XII – Commercial Districts REQUEST DETAILS: Meijer Stores Limited Partnership is seeking Concept PUD Plan approval for a Commercial PUD development to include a 193,000 sq. ft. supercenter and 2500 sq. ft. gas station, and four commercial outlots near the northeast corner of Keats Avenue and Hudson Boulevard. The applicant Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 2 has an option to purchase the property and is seeking Concept PUD Plan approval in order to determine whether to move forward with the purchase and other required approvals. The Concept PUD Plan approval is the first step in a multiple step process to develop the property. Prior to development, the developer will need the following approvals from the City:  Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Commercial  Rezone the property from RT – Rural Transitional to Commercial PUD  Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD  Final Plat and Final PUD  Conditional Use Permit The Concept PUD requires a public hearings. A public hearing will also be required when the applicant applies for Preliminary Plat/Preliminary PUD. The site is guided in the City’s Comprehensive Plan as Medium Density Residential along 5th Street and Commercial near Hudson Boulevard, and is within the Stage 3 Regional Sewer Area. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND ANALYSIS: The applicant, Meijer Stores Limited Partnership, is seeking Concept PUD approval at this time to determine whether their concept for a Commercial PUD development will be acceptable to the City prior to purchasing the property. The applicant has indicated that it does not intend to develop the site for several years. PUD Process. The Concept PUD process is intended to provide the applicant with an opportunity to gather information and obtain guidance as to the general suitability of the proposal before incurring substantial expenses in the preparation of plans, surveys and other data. The submitted application and plans are in keeping with the intended purpose of the concept phase of the process. The applicant has provided plans and a narrative, but not a great amount of detail. Staff’s comments represent a high level review of the concept plans and potential issues. The approval of the PUD Concept Plan does not afford the developer/applicant any rights as would a Preliminary Plat/Preliminary PUD. Staff has reviewed the Meijer Concept PUD Plans and has provided the Commission/Council with a general description of key elements of the proposal and has identified potential issues related to it. The PUD process is appropriate for the proposed development to allow flexibility in the location, design and mix of commercial uses on a single large site. The proposed development will certainly meets one or more of the identified objectives of the PUD, Section 154.751. The underlying proposed zoning will be Commercial, so the plans should be reviewed in the context of Commercial Zoning Standards. Some standards will be the same as the Commercial Zoning District, but others will likely differ. The City will need to consider where flexibility from the Commercial standards are permissible based on their impact, positive or negative, towards achieving a project that utilizes the site’s unique features and achieves a higher quality of development. A PUD is required to meet one or more of the following objectives (City Code Section 154.751): Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 3 A. Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than conventional approaches. B. Promotion of integrated land uses, allowing for a mixture of residential, commercial, and public facilities. C. Provision of more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development techniques. D. Accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities and/or commercial facilities; and especially to create additional opportunities for senior and affordable housing. E. Preservation and enhancement of important environmental features through careful and sensitive placement of buildings and facilities. F. Preservation of historic buildings, structures or landscape features. G. Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within the development and surrounding land uses. H. Creation of more efficient provision of public utilities and services, lessened demand on transportation, and the promotion of energy resource conservation. I. Allowing the development to operate in concert with a redevelopment plan in certain areas of the City and to ensure the redevelopment goals and objectives will be achieved. J. Higher standards of site and building design than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development technique. The applicant provided a Concept PUD Plan and narrative describing the project. Concept PUD Area. The concept plans identify a commercial PUD development on 54.96 acres site located on the northeast corner of Keats Ave and Hudson Boulevard. The current use of the site is agricultural. The site consists of open rolling farm land with the exception of 3 existing wetlands, 76, 327 sq. ft., 15,057 sq. ft., and 75,225 sq. ft. in size, respectively and lowland wooded areas surrounding the wetlands. Running along the north edge of the property, is a 75 ft. electric transmission easement and at the northwest corner, an easement for shared access onto Keats Avenue. The concept PUD identifies the following site areas:  17.64 acre commercial site for the Meijer supercenter;  4. 98 acre site for a Meijer convenience gas station;  Commercial Outlots A-E, 1.31 acres, 1.03 acres, 1.09 acres, 1.44 acres, and 24.55 acres, respectively; and  2.65 acres for 5th Street Right of Way Meijer Supercenter. The Meijer Supercenter is proposed on the 17.64 acres site and will consist of a 193,000 sq. ft. retail store. The Meijer Supercenter has a “one-stop-shopping” concept, providing fresh produce, meat and bakery, drive-through pharmacy, apparel, outdoor garden center, and electronics. The concept also includes a stand along gas station (described below). The main building will have curbside pickup area and loading docks on the south side of the building. Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 4 According to the applicant, Meijer stores employ more than 270 full- and part-time workers at each store, donate more than 6 percent of its net profit to charitable organizations each year, support local growers and suppliers buy buying local when possible, has free prescription programs, clinical services and immunizations with its pharmacy. The roughly 13,400 outdoor garden center is located at the north side of the proposed building. About 12,000 sq. ft. of area is attached to the main building and a 3,400 sq. ft. seasonal display area is set-off nearer to the main parking lot. The garden center areas are enclosed, most likely with some sort of fence, although no detail or photos of the garden center have been provided with the application. The proposed pharmacy will include a drive-through facility. The drive through passes between the outdoor garden center and the seasonal display area. The drive-through facilities require a conditional use permit in the Commercial Zoning District and will need to comply with City Code Section 154.310, Subd B which provides standards for drive-through facilities. The drive-through will be required to provide an emergency exit lane, not identified in the current plan submittal. The proposed access to the Meijer Supercenter is off of a newly proposed extension of 5th Street. The concept plans identify 3 points of access from 5th Street for the Supercenter. The first is the main access to the commercial outlots, the second to the front of the Meijer store, and the third primarily for truck access. The access points do not comply with the City’s access management standards which will be discussed separately in this report. The Supercenter building is shown with a 60 ft. setback from the east property line. The City Code requires a 50 ft. setback from residential areas. The area to the east of the site is guided as future Urban Low Density. Meijer Convenience Gas Station. The PUD concept plans identify a 2,509 sq. ft. convenience gas station with six gas pumps, a large canopy overhead and 16 parking stalls. The convenience gas station will sell propane from an underground fuel tank, ice, and other convenience items. The concept plans also identify outdoor sales display areas at the ends of the gas pump platforms and around the proposed building as is typical of convenience stores. The gas station area shows 16 parking stalls, a dumpster enclosure, and an air/vacuum unit. Gas stations require a conditional use permit in the Commercial Zoning district are subject to specific development standards in City Code Section 154.305, Subd. B. The standards provide guidance related to screening, landscaping, lighting, vehicle storage, signs and outdoor display primarily. The concept plans do not provide enough detail to fully evaluate the conformance to the standards, however, there appears to be no issues with the proposed plans other than site access management to be addressed separately in this report. Outlots A-D, Future Commercial Development. Oulots A-D represent future commercial building sites. The minimum site area for commercial development in the C – Commercial Zoning District is 20,000 sq. ft. or .46 acres. The commercial outlots range in size from 1.03 to 1.47 acres in size. Each conform to the Commercial Zoning Districts lot width and size requirements. Access to the commercial outlots will be from a shared driveway which connects to 5th Street. According to the applicant, this driveway is critical to the success of the future commercial outlots, however, it does Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 5 not meet the City’s access management standards (to be discussed later in this report). No specific land uses have been identified for the outlots at this time. Future permitted and conditional land uses will need to be identified in a future PUD Agreement, or would default to the uses in the C - Commercial Zoning District. 5th Street. The 5th Street corridor is a 100 ft. collector roadway that is planned to extend across this development site toward the east. The developer will be required to construct the corridor with the development according to the 5th Street design standards and specifications, the same as was required of developments in the phase 1 and phase 2 sewer areas. The planned corridor will include trails, sidewalks, and landscaped medians and boulevards. Shoreland Regulations. A portion of the site lies within the 1000 foot shoreland of Kramer Lake, a Natural Development Lake, and that portion of the site is subject to the shoreland regulations. The shoreland regulations limit impervious surfaces within the shoreland to 35%, or 50% with riparian dedication. The developer’s narrative is claiming the 50% impervious, but requiring some other development/land owner to provide the riparian dedication. The development of this site cannot be premised on a land dedication by another future development or property owner. The maximum impervious for the portion of the site within the shoreland is 35% because there is no riparian land to dedicate at this time. The proposed Meijer store is located in the shoreland portion of the site and appears to exceed the 35% maximum impervious limit. A copy of the concept plans were sent to the MN/DNR, however, no review comments have been provided. Access Management. The 5th Street corridor was planned as a collector road with access management. The City’s access management standards limit full driveway access to 660 ft. spacing and restricted access to 330 ft. spacing. This standard was clearly communicated in the predevelopment meeting held with the developer. The proposed PUD Concept Plan and narrative provided by the developer are requesting an exception to this standard. The Meijer Concept Plans show a full access drive at 350 ft. from the Keats Ave and 5th Street intersection and a second full access further to the east and the developer believes the exception to be critical to the viability of the proposed commercial outlots A-D along Keats Avenue. Municipal Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply. The proposed site is located within the Stage 3 Regional Sewer area. There are no specific plans to bring sewer and water to the site at this time. The Development will be responsible for bringing sewer and water to the site as part of the development, or will have to wait for other development to bring the services to the site. The timing of this project has not been determined, the developer has not committed to bringing the sewer and water to the site and may wait for other development. The developer’s narrative describes the options it has considered for bringing sanitary sewer to the site. Traffic. No formal traffic study has been provided with this concept plan. At the concept level, the City Engineer did not expect a formal study, in particular, the 5th Street corridor has been planned anticipating commercial development such as the Meijer concept plan. A traffic study will be required as part of a preliminary plat/preliminary PUD application and will identify the need and timing of roadway improvements such as number of turn lanes, street lights, etc., and will identify Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 6 more regional traffic impacts and needs. The developer has provided estimated traffic volumes based on similar Meijer store projects located elsewhere. Parking. The concept plans identify a Meijer parking lot with 748 parking stalls, of which 15 are handicapped accessible. There are 18 shopping cart corals shown within the parking lot. The City’s parking standards require 1 space for every 250 sq. ft. of gross floor area. For the proposed Meijer store, 772 parking stalls are required. The applicant has provided 24 fewer stalls than required. Stormwater Management. There are 3 existing wetlands located on the proposed development site, all located on Outlot E. The concept plans keep the development confined to the northern portion of the site, outside the wetlands and buffer areas. A larger stormwater detention basin is proposed near and between existing wetlands on Oulot E. A second detention basin is identified to the north of the site, north of 5th Street adjacent to the proposed gas station. A third dention basin is identified to the north of the proposed Meijer store. The developer plans to comply with Valley Branch Watershed District and City requirements. The VBWD has not formally reviewed the concept plans. Outlot E. Outlot E is 24.55 acres and contains 3 existing wetlands, 76, 327 sq. ft., 15,057 sq. ft, and 75,225 sq. ft. in size, respectively. The outlot also contains the largest of 3 proposed stormwater detention basins.. It is unclear whether commercial development is proposed for Outlot E and if so, where access will be for the development. PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES/STAFF COMMENTS: The Concept PUD raises a number of issues related to the appropriateness of the project for the site and the City. The Planning, Public Works, Engineering, and Fire Departments have reviewed the proposed PUD Concept Plan and provided comments in the following areas:  Moratorium  Comprehensive Plan Land Use Guide and Sanitary Sewer Phasing  Environmental Review.  Access Management.  Public Street Access to Adjacent Property  Shoreland Regulations.  Municipal Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply  Stormwater Management  Setbacks  Park Dedication/Parks and Trails  Other Standards and Guidelines.  Sanitary Sewer Expansion.  PUD Agreement  PUD Flexibility Moratorium. The parcels are in the Phase III of the Regional Sewer Staging Plan and the area is presently subject to the moratorium, Ordinance 08-123. The Ordinance places a moratorium on the Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 7 consideration and/or approval of any subdivision or development project within the State 2 or Stage 3 areas except for: a) Projects that have been granted concept, preliminary, or final plan and/or plat approval; or b) Commercial development in cases where the City Council determines that the project provides sufficient incremental tax value to the community and the developer would bear the whole cost of extending public infrastructure to the development. Approval of this PUD Concept Plan by the City Council will allow the applicant to proceed with application for Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plans as per Ordinance 08-123, Section 2. Comprehensive Plan. The north half of the site is guided for Medium Density Residential and the southern half, Commercial. The entire area is within the Phase III of the Regional Sewer Staging Plan. As for the staging, the Comprehensive Plan states: The City will monitor growth by assessing market conditions, land capacity, and the availability of public infrastructure in order to determine when development may occur in stages subsequent to the first stage. The acceleration of a development in any of the latter stages may be permitted by the City provided it is demonstrated that adequate public infrastructure exists to support this development. The availability of infrastructure and any necessary utility extensions and transportation improvements needed to support new development will be considered in deciding whether or not to open up the next staging area to development. In order to accelerate the development of latter stages, there must be a commitment that the development will pay its proportionate share of the infrastructure costs to extend services to any new development. The proposed project is entirely commercial in nature and will require a comprehensive plan amendment. The City is required to maintain adequate area designated as high and medium density residential in its comprehensive plan to maintain the average 3 units per acre density in the sewered areas and to meet its 2030 affordable housing goals. Any future amendment to the comprehensive plan should be based on consideration of the 2015 Metropolitan Council System Statement, and the City’s future comprehensive plan update process. Environmental Review. The City has discretionary authority with this application to request an EAW to address broader environmental impacts with this application, however, because the project is only in a concept level and does not afford the developer with any actual development rights, the City will defer any EAW until a formal applications is made for Preliminary Plat/Preliminary PUD/Rezoning/ or Comprehensive Plan Amendment. An EAW will be required at that time to evaluate the impacts such as those relating to the shoreland of Kramer Lake, traffic, and expansion of the municipal sewer system and water supply. Access Management. According to the City Engineer’s memo dated June 13, 2016, access management is critical to the performance of 5th Street. Full access is allowed every 660 feet and restricted access is allowed every 330 feet. The concept PUD plans show full access at 350 feet from the Keats Avenue intersection. The plans should be amended such that this intersection is a right-in, right-out only with a center median. The applicant has indicated that the full access at 350 is critical for the success of the commercial outlots. Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 8 Public Street Access to Adjacent Properties. The concept PUD plans show an extension of 5th Street eastward, but does not provide street access to the land parcel to the north of the PUD site. The plans should be amended such that access is provided to the north to avoid the creation of landlocked parcels. The City Engineer recommends this street access be provided at the second intersection for the convenience gas station. The City Engineer recommends 60 feet of right-of-way for residential streets and 80 feet of right-of-way for commercial. Shoreland Regulations. The proposed Meijer Supercenter store is within the shoreland of Kramer Lake and the concept plans clearly exceed the 35% impervious area allowed within the shoreland. The site plans will need to be revised. Any development within the shorelands will need to be subject on MNDNR review and approval. Municipal Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply. The applicant has identified some options for bringing sanitary sewer and water supply to the site. Please see the City Engineers review memo dated June 13, 2016 for comments related to each. Stormwater Management. The concept PUD plans show stormwater facilities. Please see the City Engineer’s review memo dated June 13, 2016 for comments related to required stormwater facilities. Setbacks. The proposed development generally conforms to the setback requirements of the Commercial Zoning along the edges of the development. That being said, the area to the east of the proposed commercial development is guided for future Urban Low Density Residential development and the City should consider requiring a setback from the residential district that is greater than what is being proposed, or require a higher level of screening than what is required by strict application of code. Park Dedication/Parks and Trails. The park land dedication requirements for the proposed Commercial PUD is presently $4,500.00 per acre. The actual park land dedication will be determined collected at the time of final plat based on the fee schedule determined by Resolution of the City Council at the beginning of each year. The proposed trails for the 5th Street corridor are required as indicated in the 5th Street Design Standards. The Parks Commission reviewed the Concept PUD Plans on June 20 and had concerns about the traffic and the safety of future trail users. Other Standards and Guidelines. The Concept PUD Plans have provided some detail, but has remained silent on others. Article 5, 6 and 7 of the City Code and City’s Design Guidelines contain standards that have not been fully addressed in the concept PUD submittal. Some of the standards and guidelines not addressed include, but are not limited to:  Signs Regulations  Landscaping, screening and tree preservation  Lighting  Exterior storage and display  Architectural standards/character/theming  Fencing  Public gathering areas  On site pedestrian circulation Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 9  Shared parking between uses/sites PUD Agreement. As this development plan progresses toward development, a PUD Agreement will be required that clearly articulates permitted and conditional uses, placement of structures, development intensity, density, setbacks and building requirements, lot requirements, signage, or other elements of the plan that deviate from the Commercial Zoning District standards. The PUD Agreement will provide the development regulations that prevail for the site. Those items not addressed by the PUD Agreement will default to the underlying Commercial Zoning standards. The applicant has provided detail related to a future PUD Agreement at this time. PUD Flexibility. PUD Plans inherently provide some flexibility from underlying development standards in exchange for a higher quality of development. At this time, the applicant has not requested any flexibility from the Commercial Zoning Standards other than an exception to the access management standards. Based on a review of the concept plans, in addition to the access management standards, plans deviate from the City’s parking standards and drive-through standards. As details emerge, there may be other standards that the City may need to consider when evaluating the overall development to ensure the developer can construct the Meijer Store and future outlots as planned, yet utilizes the site’s unique features and achieves a quality of development that exceeds that of a typical commercial development. A future PUD Agreement may need to regulate the following on the site:  Allowed Permitted and Commercial Uses  Access management  Parking  Drive-through facilities  Landscaping  Signs  Setbacks  Shared parking arrangements  Landscaping and screening  Lighting  Exterior Storage  Architectural Standards/Character/Theming  Fencing  Public gathering areas  On site pedestrian circulation  Shared parking between uses/sites CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Based on review of the applicant’s narrative and Concept PUD Plans, City Code, Standards and Guidelines, City Staff recommends the following conditions of approval if approval is recommended at this time: Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 10 1) Approval for the Concept Plan be contingent on approval of a comprehensive plan amendment by the City and Metropolitan Council, amending the Medium Density Residential to a Commercial land use designation. 2) The preliminary and final development plans shall address all comments from the City Engineer in his review letter dated June 13, 2016. 3) For all publicly owned infrastructure, Preliminary and Final Plans must be prepared accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual using City details and specifications and meeting City Engineering Design Guidelines. 4) The applicant shall prepare an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, EAW, addressing traffic impact, regional floodplain, municipal sanitary sewer and water supply expansion and another environmental impacts prior to the submission of preliminary and final plans. 5) The preliminary PUD Plans be subject to MN/DNR and Washington County conditions and approval. 6) The preliminary PUD Plans shall be revised to comply with the Valley Branch Watershed District requirements. 7) A Conditional Use Permit is required for any drive-through facility, gas station, outdoor storage or display and other uses per Section 154.551 unless specifically addressed in a PUD Agreement. 8) The garden center, gas station, drive-through facility shall comply with the Specific Development Standards, Article VII, Section 154.300-154.310. 9) The preliminary and final development plans shall include detailed landscape plans that conform to the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance and that conform to the City’s Tree Protection and Replacement Ordinance. 10) The applicant shall submit detailed architectural plans at the time of the preliminary and final development plan review by the City. These plans shall conform to the City’s Design Guidelines and Standards Manual. 11) The preliminary and final development plans shall include a signage plan. 12) The preliminary and final development plans shall include a specific land use plan and narrative clarifying the uses allowed under the PUD, the dimensional requirements for the site, including any deviations from the underlying zoning, and other information deemed appropriate by the City. 13) The applicant shall pay a fee in lieu of park land dedication as determined by the City prior to a final plat being released for recording. 14) The preliminary and final plat and PUD Plans shall include all easements for drainage and utility and other purposes as required by the City Engineer. 15) All taxes due will need to be current with the County prior to any development. (The parcels are in the Green Acres and Rural Preserve programs and taxes have been deferred for some time). Planning Commission Meeting June 27, 2016 Public Hearing Action Item #4a Page 11 RECOMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission hold a public hearing to obtain public testimony, review the Concept PUD Plans and recommend approval if the Commission believes the exception to Section 2 of the Moratorium Ordinance 08-123 has been met. The recommended motion to approve is: “Move to recommend approval of the PUD Concept Plans for Meijer Store and outlots subject to the 15 conditions.” ATTACHMENTS:  Meijer application and narrative  Meijer concept PUD Plan  Alta survey  City Engineer’s review memo dated June 13, 2016  2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Staging Plan)  Ordinance 08-123 (development moratorium) 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 PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION The West 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota. Excepting therefrom the North 1135 feet thereof and except the West 124 feet of the south 1500 feet of the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4, Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, excepting the south 75 feet thereof, also a triangular parcel of land lying easterly of and adjacent to the above described 124 foot strip, and northerly of and adjacent to the 75 foot right of way of Minnesota Trunk Highway No. 12, said triangular parcel measuring 150 feet north and 150 feet east along said rights of way. Also except Parcels 5 and 6, Washington County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 48-19B. Also except that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, shown as Parcel 36 on the plat designated as Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 82-44 on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Washington County, Minnesota. Also except that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 35; thence north along the west line of said Section 35 on an azimuth of 359 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds (azimuth oriented to Minnesota State Plane Coordinate System, South Zone) for 445.53 feet; thence on an azimuth of 89 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds for 164 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B32 as shown on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 82-44, as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said County, which is the point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence on an azimuth of 359 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 274.12 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B33; thence on an azimuth of 46 degrees 46 minutes 04 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 134.45 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B25; thence southeasterly 309.48 feet along the boundary of said plat on a non-tangential curve concave to the southwest, having a radius of 448.22 feet, a delta angle of 39 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds and a chord azimuth of 120 degrees 39 minutes 35 seconds to Right of Way Boundary Corner B26; thence on an azimuth of 140 degrees 26 minutes 24 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 403.11 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B27; thence deflect to the left along the boundary of said plat on a tangential curve having a radius of 868.51 feet and a delta angle of 5 degrees 24 minutes 16 seconds for 81.92 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B28; thence on an azimuth of 210 degrees 39 minutes 53 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 115.35 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B29; thence on an azimuth of 296 degrees 20 minutes 59 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 247.39 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B30; thence on an azimuth of 277 degrees 18 minutes 47 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 287.61 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B31; thence on an azimuth of 318 degrees 12 minutes 56 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 151.16 feet to the point of beginning. AND The North 1135 feet of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, except Parcel 6, Washington County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 48- 19B. Project Information Land Owner: Durow Family Lake Elmo Property, LLC 10363 Manning Avenue S Hastings, MN 55033 Applicant: Meijer Stores Limited Partnership 2350 Three Mile Road Grand Rapids, MI 49544 Land Planner/ Civil Engineer: SPACECO, Inc. 9575 West Higgins Road Rosemont, IL 60018 Surveyor: Loucks, Inc. 7200 Hemlock Lane Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 Wetland Consultant: Kjolhaug Environmental Services 26105 Wild Rose Lane Shorewood, MN 55331 Parcel Location: Northeast corner of Keats Avenue and Hudson Boulevard. Parcel Size: 54.69 acres Current Zoning: RT – Rural Development Transitional District Surrounding Zoning: North and East - RT – Rural Development Transitional District West – C – Commercial & MDR – Urban Mediuim Density Residential South – Interstate 94 Proposed Zoning: PUD – Commercial Parcel Legal Description: The West 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota. Excepting therefrom the North 1135 feet thereof and except the West 124 feet of the south 1500 feet of the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4, Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, excepting the south 75 feet thereof, also a triangular parcel of land lying easterly of and adjacent to the above described 124 foot strip, and northerly of and adjacent to the 75 foot right of way of Minnesota Trunk Highway No. 12, said triangular parcel measuring 150 feet north and 150 feet east along said rights of way. Also except Parcels 5 and 6, Washington County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 48-19B. Also except that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, shown as Parcel 36 on the plat designated as Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 82-44 on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Washington County, Minnesota. Also except that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 35; thence north along the west line of said Section 35 on an azimuth of 359 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds (azimuth oriented to Minnesota State Plane Coordinate System, South Zone) for 445.53 feet; thence on an azimuth of 89 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds for 164 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B32 as shown on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 82-44, as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said County, which is the point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence on an azimuth of 359 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 274.12 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B33; thence on an azimuth of 46 degrees 46 minutes 04 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 134.45 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B25; thence southeasterly 309.48 feet along the boundary of said plat on a non-tangential curve concave to the southwest, having a radius of 448.22 feet, a delta angle of 39 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds and a chord azimuth of 120 degrees 39 minutes 35 seconds to Right of Way Boundary Corner B26; thence on an azimuth of 140 degrees 26 minutes 24 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 403.11 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B27; thence deflect to the left along the boundary of said plat on a tangential curve having a radius of 868.51 feet and a delta angle of 5 degrees 24 minutes 16 seconds for 81.92 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B28; thence on an azimuth of 210 degrees 39 minutes 53 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 115.35 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B29; thence on an azimuth of 296 degrees 20 minutes 59 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 247.39 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B30; thence on an azimuth of 277 degrees 18 minutes 47 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 287.61 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B31; thence on an azimuth of 318 degrees 12 minutes 56 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 151.16 feet to the point of beginning. AND The North 1135 feet of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, except Parcel 6, Washington County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 48-19B. Project Description: The proposed development consists of an approximately 193,000 sf Meijer supercenter and 2,500 sf gas station and four commercial outlots. Outlot E will be left undeveloped and used for preservation of existing wetland areas and storm water management. The project also includes the extension of 5th Street with a 100’ right-of-way from Keats Avenue through the parcel in accordance with the City’s Transportation plan. The property is currently zoned Rural Development Transitional District, an area defined in the zoning code as a holding zone where the City has planned and staged for development that will connect to regional sewers in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The Comprehensive Plan has this parcel planned for both Commercial and Medium Density Residential/Mixed Uses. We believe the development proposal is in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan of providing local commercial benefit to current and future residents of the City. Meijer is a family-owned and privately-held company that began during the Great Depression when Hendrik Meijer, and his 14-year-old son, Fred, fulfilled a need in the community. Together, they evolved the small grocery store into a one-stop shopping experience for customers. Today, Meijer is based in Grand Rapids, Michigan and has over 220 stores and employs 65,000 team members throughout Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky and Wisconsin. As a pioneer of the “one-stop shopping” concept, a typical Meijer store includes expanded fresh produce, meat and bakery departments, as well as full service pharmacy with drive through, comprehensive apparel departments, outdoor garden centers and electronics offerings. A standalone gas station with 12 fueling dispensers is also provided. Meijer’s philosophy is to strengthen and support the communities where its customers and team members work and live. This commitment is fulfilled through superior customer service, low prices, quality foods and broad selections of national and Meijer brand items. Meijer also supports a wide variety of nonprofit organizations by donating more than 6 percent of its net profit to charity each year, and sponsoring hundreds of community events its customers hold dear. As Meijer continues to grow, it will remain true to the simple philosophy of its founder: “… take care of your customers, team members, and community … and all of those will take care of you, just like a family.” Meijer New Store Opening Meijer is a family-owned and privately-held company committed to meeting the needs of families in the communities of each of its 223 stores throughout Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky and Wisconsin. With the help of Meijer team members and customers, Meijer is able to make the community a better place to live, work and play. Meijer is pleased to continue to invest in Midwest communities: ENRICHING THE COMMUNITY • Meijer employs more than 270 full- and part- time team members at each store • Meijer supports its communities through creation of jobs, tax revenue and philanthropic support • Meijer donates more than 6 percent of its net profit to charitable organizations each year • Meijer has a long-standing commitment to supporting local growers and buying local when available and when the quality meets Meijer high standards • The locally-grown program has a total economic impact of nearly $100 million annually • The Meijer Simply Give program has generated more than $18 million to help local food pantries serve hungry families • Meijer’s team of Healthy Living Advisors provide communities with education on planning healthy and affordable meals, and cooking for special dietary needs ONE-STOP SHOPPING EXPERIENCE • More than 100,000 different products available at affordable prices • Meijer stores offer 600+ types of high quality fresh produce • A true marketplace feel to our store, providing fresh produce delivered daily, bakery items, such as bread and custom decorated cakes made throughout the day, and a full-service deli. • A traditional butcher shop environment, complete with certified meat cutters and full- service meat counters with custom-cuts of Certified Angus Beef. • Meijer stores offer full-service pharmacies, free prescription programs, clinical services and immunizations • Meijer stores include an expansive Garden Center and fresh floral arrangements • Many Meijer stores offer a gas station and convenience store Fact Sheet S T O P S T O P S T O P S T O P S T O P S T O P S T O P S T O P 1 9 2 , 9 4 0 S Q . F T . R 7 6 , 3 2 7 S Q - F T E X . W E T L A N D # 1 7 5 , 2 2 5 S Q - F T E X . W E T L A N D # 3 B A S I N D E T E N T I O N HUDSON BOULEVARD KEATS A VEN UE 5 T H S T R E E T E X T E N S I O N B A S I N D E T E N T I O N D E T E N T I O N B A S I N (TYP.) ( T Y P . ) (TYP. OF 18) CART CORRAL 1 0 1 6 2 5 6 1 6 1 6 (TYP.) 1 5 , 0 5 7 S Q - F T E X . W E T L A N D # 2 3 4 6 . 3 6 ' 3 2 4 . 8 8 ' 6 0 ' 6 0 ' L I N E E A S E M E N T T R A N S M I S S I O N E X . 7 5 ' E L E C T R I C 9 . 5 ' C E N T E R O U T D O O R G A R D E N D R I V E - U P P H A R M A C Y C A R T E N T R A N C E S T O R A G E C A R T C R O S S W A L K M A I N E N T R A N C E B I K E R A C K T R U C K D O C K R E C I E V I N G C O M P A C T O R R E C E I V I N G G R A D E L E V E L P A D E Q U I P M E N T E L E C T R I C A L S T O R A G E T E M P O R A R Y C A R T C A R T E N T R A N C E C R O S S W A L K M A I N E N T R A N C E A R E A S E A S O N A L D I S P L A Y 6 ' S I D E W A L K 1 0 ' E A S E M E N T E N C L O S U R E D U M P S T E R U N I T A I R / V A C U U M P R O P A N E S A L E S I C E S A L E S O F D I S P E N S E R S ( T Y P . ) S A L E S A R E A A T B O T H E N D S S E A S O N A L O U T D O O R P A T H 1 0 ' A S P H A L T S H E L T E R S M O K I N G E X . H I G H W A Y E A S E M E N T 5 0 ' W E T L A N D B U F F E R 5 0 ' W E T L A N D B U F F E R ( C I T Y O F L A K E E L M O ) T R A N S I T I O N A L D I S T R I C T R T - R U R A L D E V E L O P M E N T ( C I T Y O F L A K E E L M O ) T R A N S I T I O N A L D I S T R I C T R T - R U R A L D E V E L O P M E N T ( C I T Y O F L A K E E L M O ) D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L M D R - U R B A N M E D I U M ( C I T Y O F L A K E E L M O ) C - C O M M E R C I A L ( C I T Y O F L A K E E L M O ) C - C O M M E R C I A L T R A F F I C S I G N A L P O T E N T I A L F U T U R E 2 8 5 ' R . O . W . 3 0 ' B U I L D I NG S E T B A C K 3 0 ' B U I L D I NG S E T B A C K SETBACK 30' S E T B A C K B U I L D I N G 2 2 8 ' R . O . W . 1 9 8 ' R . O . W . P I C K U P C U R B S I D E 0 SCALE 1" = 80' 80 160 N P A R K I N G S U M M A R Y A C R E A G E S U M M A R Y 5 4 . 6 9 A . 2 . 6 5 A . 2 4 . 5 5 A . 1 . 4 4 A . 1 . 0 9 A . 1 . 0 3 A . 1 . 3 1 A . 4 . 9 8 A . 1 7 . 6 4 A . 60'150.5' F U E L T A N K S U N D E R G R O U N D F U E L T A N K S U N D E R G R O U N D N E C O R N E R O F K E A T S A V E N U E A N D H U D S O N B O U L E V A R D L A K E E L M O , M I N N E S O T A 1 8857.CONCEPT.SITE.PLAN.dgn CSP1 3 0 ' 3 9 8 . 7 1 ' 19'19'25'19'19' 63' 30'BUILDING E X . 5 0 ' H I GH W AY E A S E M E N T 185.61'150'150'187.05' 35' 358.15' SIGN P R O T E C T I O N L I N E 1 0 0 0 ' S H O R E L A N D P R O T E C T I O N L I N E 1 0 0 0 ' S H O R E L A N D P R O T E C T I O N L I N E 1 0 0 0 ' S H O R E L A N D 50'WETLA N D BUFFER 3 0 ' B U I L D I NG S E T B A C K 100'R.O.W. 10 0' R. O. W. C O N C E P T S I T E P L A N T O T A L P A R K I N G A D A P A R K I N G P A R K I N G P R O V I D E D M A I N S T O R E 7 4 8 2 4 7 2 4 T O T A L P A R K I N G A D A P A R K I N G P A R K I N G P R O V I D E D C O N V E N I E N C E S T O R E 1 6 1 1 5 100'R.O.W. 10'EASEMENT 10'EASEMENT 100'R.O.W. 10'EASEMENT 2 , 5 0 9 S Q . F T . G A S S T A T I O N R = 6 6 7 ' R = 6 6 7 ' T O T A L 5 T H S T R E E T R . O . W . O U T L O T E O U T L O T D O U T L O T C O U T L O T B O U T L O T A C O N V E N I E N C E S T O R E M A I N S T O R E 2 4 . 5 5 A C R E S O U T L O T E 1 . 4 7 A C R E S O U T L O T D 1 . 1 2 A C R E S O U T L O T C 1 . 0 3 A C R E S O U T L O T B 1 . 3 1 A C R E S O U T L O T A OF JOB NO. FILENAME: DATE: SHEET N O . D A T E R E M A R K S R E M A R K S D A T E N O . P h o n e : ( 8 4 7 ) 6 9 6 - 4 0 6 0 F a x : ( 8 4 7 ) 6 9 6 - 4 0 6 5 R o s e m o n t , I l l i n o i s 6 0 0 1 8 9 5 7 5 W . H i g g i n s R o a d , S u i t e 7 0 0 , 8857 05/16/16 1 L A K E E L M O , M I N N E S O T A N:\Projects\8857\EXHIBITS\8857-CONCEPT PLAN(30X42).dgn Default User=bbarker LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 1 5 \ 1 5 4 0 1 \ C A D D D A T A \ S U R V E Y \ S 1 5 4 0 1 - M a s t e r Pl o t t e d : 0 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 6 3 : 3 5 P M 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. CADD QUALIFICATION KEATS AVE & HUDSON BLVD LAKE ELMO, MN SPACECO, INC. 9575 W. HIGGINS ROAD SUITE 700 ROSEMONT, IL 60018 License No. Date I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. VICINITY MAP Field Crew Henry D. Nelson - PLS 17255 Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No.15-401 HN JT/MS HN NL 12/03/15 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY 1 OF 2 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED (Per Schedule A of the herein referenced Title Commitment) Parcel 1: The West 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota. Excepting therefrom the North 1135 feet thereof and except the West 124 feet of the south 1500 feet of the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4, Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, excepting the south 75 feet thereof, also a triangular parcel of land lying easterly of and adjacent to the above described 124 foot strip, and northerly of and adjacent to the 75 foot right of way of Minnesota Trunk Highway No. 12, said triangular parcel measuring 150 feet north and 150 feet east along said rights of way. Also except Parcels 5 and 6, Washington County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 48-19B. Also except that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, shown as Parcel 36 on the plat designated as Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 82-44 on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Washington County, Minnesota. Also except that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 35; thence north along the west line of said Section 35 on an azimuth of 359 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds (azimuth oriented to Minnesota State Plane Coordinate System, South Zone) for 445.53 feet; thence on an azimuth of 89 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds for 164 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B32 as shown on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 82-44, as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said County, which is the point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence on an azimuth of 359 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 274.12 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B33; thence on an azimuth of 46 degrees 46 minutes 04 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 134.45 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B25; thence southeasterly 309.48 feet along the boundary of said plat on a non-tangential curve concave to the southwest, having a radius of 448.22 feet, a delta angle of 39 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds and a chord azimuth of 120 degrees 39 minutes 35 seconds to Right of Way Boundary Corner B26; thence on an azimuth of 140 degrees 26 minutes 24 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 403.11 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B27; thence deflect to the left along the boundary of said plat on a tangential curve having a radius of 868.51 feet and a delta angle of 5 degrees 24 minutes 16 seconds for 81.92 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B28; thence on an azimuth of 210 degrees 39 minutes 53 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 115.35 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B29; thence on an azimuth of 296 degrees 20 minutes 59 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 247.39 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B30; thence on an azimuth of 277 degrees 18 minutes 47 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 287.61 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B31; thence on an azimuth of 318 degrees 12 minutes 56 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 151.16 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: The North 1135 feet of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 35, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, except Parcel 6, Washington County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 48-19B. Abstract TITLE COMMITMENT EXCEPTIONS (Per Schedule B, Part II of the herein referenced Title Commitment) The property depicted on this survey and the easements of record shown hereon are the same as the property and the easements described in the Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Stewart Title Guaranty Company, File No. 01040-13260-Amendment No. 2 (March 29, 2016), dated March 10, 2016. The numbers below correspond to those in the title commitment. 1 - 11, 15, and 16 do not require comment. 12. Easement for electric transmission line purposes, and the terms and conditions thereof, granted to Northern States Power Company in Easement (Minnesota), dated 5-4-1965, in Book 277 page 553 as Document No. 243694. Assignment and Assumption of Easements, as to above, dated 2-7-2001, filed 3-8-2001 as Document No. 3145752. [We have shown the approximate location of this easement based on the location of the existing power poles as located.] 13. Permanent drainage easement, and the terms and conditions thereof, conveyed to Washington County in Highway Easement, dated 8-10-1986, filed 8-28-1986 as Document No. 515415. 14. Permanent easement for the purpose of access to County Road 19B, and the terms and conditions thereof, conveyed to Washington County in Highway Easement, dated 8-10-1986, filed 8-28-1986 as Document No. 515416. ALTA/NSPS OPTIONAL TABLE A NOTES (The following items refer to Table A optional survey responsibilities and specifications) 1. Monuments placed (or a reference monument or witness to the corner) at all major corners of the boundary of the property, unless already marked or referenced by existing monuments or witnesses to the corner are shown hereon. 2. The address, if disclosed in documents provided to or obtained by the surveyor, or observed while conducting the fieldwork, is unassigned. 3. This property is contained in Zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain) per Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 27163C0335E, effective date of February 3, 2010. 4. The Gross land area is 2,382,182 +/- square feet or 54.69 +/- acres. Parcel 1 is 1,119,205 +/- square feet or 25.69 +/- acres. Parcel 2 is 1,262,977 +/- square feet or 29.00 +/- acres. 6. (a) We were not provided zoning information by the insurer, however, per the city of Lake Elmo zoning map, on October 20, 2015, the current zoning classification for the subject property is as follows: Zone RT (Rural Development Transitional District). 8. Substantial features observed in the process of conducting fieldwork, are shown hereon. 9. There are no striped parking stalls on this site. 11. We have shown underground utilities on and/or serving the surveyed property per Gopher State One-Call Ticket Nos. 152730980 and 152730982. The following utilities and municipalities were notified: AT&T TRANSMISSION - (903) 753-3145 CITY OF WOODBURY - (651) 714-3720 CENTER POINT ENERGY - (800) 778-9140 WASHINGTON CO TPD - (651) 430-4300 CITY OF LAKE ELMO - (651) 770-2537 ZAYO GROUP - (952) 230-9430 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - (651) 366-5750 COMCAST - (612) 522-8141 LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS - (877) 366-8344 CENTURYLINK - (855) 742-6062 METRO WASTE COMMISSION - (651) 602-4511 XCEL ENERGY - (651) 229-2427 WASHINGTON COUNTY - (320) 963-2400 XCEL ENERGY - (651) 229-2427 i. Utility operators do not consistently respond to locate requests through the Gopher State One Call service for surveying purposes such as this. Those utility operators that do respond, often will not locate utilities from their main line to the customer's structure or facility. They consider those XWLOLWLHVßSULYDWHàLQVWDOODWLRQVWKDWDUHRXWVLGHWKHLUMXULVGLFWLRQ7KHVHßSULYDWHàXWLOLWLHVRQWKHVXUYH\HGSURSHUW\RUDGMRLQLQJSURSHUWLHVPD\QRW be located since most operators will not mark such "private" utilities. A private utility locator may be contacted to investigate these utilities further, if requested by the client. ii. The locations of underground utility lines shown hereon is an approximation based on available maps, unless otherwise noted on the survey. iii. Maps provided by those notified above, either along with a field location or in lieu of such a location, are very often inaccurate or inconclusive. EXTREME CAUTION MUST BE EXERCISED BEFORE AN EXCAVATION TAKES PLACE ON OR NEAR THIS SITE. BEFORE DIGGING, YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO NOTIFY GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE AT 811 or (651) 454-0002. 17. We are not aware of any proposed changes in street right of way lines or evidence of recent street or sidewalk construction or repairs observed in the process of conducting our field work. SURVEY REPORT 1. The Surveyor was not provided utility easement documents for the subject property except for those shown on the Survey. 2. The bearings for this survey are based on the Washington County Coordinate System NAD 83 (1986 Adjust). 3. BENCHMARKS: MnDOT Name: 8282 AX; GSID Station #100689; Located in Lake Elmo, 0.05 miles E along Hwy. 94 from junction of Hwy. 94 & Woodbury Dr. (Keats Ave. N.) in Lake Elmo, at Hwy. 94 mile point 251.75, 69.8 ft. N of westbound Hwy. 94 fog line, 1.5 ft. S of witness post. MnDOT Name: 8282 AF; GSID Station #33428; Located 2.0 miles NE of Woodbury at junction of Hwy. 94 & Co. Rd. 19, in top of railing at SE corner of Co. Rd. 19 Bridge No. 82844 over Hwy. 94, at Hwy. 94 mile point 251.65, 31 ft. NNW of end fence post, 24.8 ft. E of northbound Co. Rd. 19, 20.3 ft. N of S end of bridge railing, 8.6 ft. W of cyclone fence. 4. A gravel driveway falls on the property at the NW corner of Parcel 2. 5. A utility pedestal falls on the property line, approx. 150 ft. E of the SW corner of Parcel 1. 6. The City of Lake Elmo Engineering Department informed us that the existing sanitary sewer and force main on the east side of Keats Avenue N. does not have the capacity to support the development of the subject property. 7. The parcels described and shown hereon, as we have surveyed them, are contiguous. 8. See Sheet 2 for topography and existing site features. CERTIFICATION To Meijer Stores Limited Partnership; Durow Family Lake Elmo Property, LLC and Stewart Title Guaranty Company: This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2016 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1 - 4, 6(a), 8, 9, 11(a), 11(b), 17, and 20 of Table A thereof. The field work was completed on December 02, 2015. Date of Plat or Map: April 18, 2016 ______________________________________________ Henry D. Nelson, PLS Minnesota License No. 17255 hnelson@loucksinc.com 12 14 13 12/03/15 DRAWING ISSUED 12/23/15 DRAWING REVISED 01/11/16 DRAWING REVISED 04/15/16 DRAWING REVISED 04/18/16 DRAWING REVISED SCALE IN FEET 0 100 200 LOUCKS W: \ 2 0 1 5 \ 1 5 4 0 1 \ C A D D D A T A \ S U R V E Y \ S 1 5 4 0 1 - M a s t e r Pl o t t e d : 0 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 6 3 : 3 4 P M 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. CADD QUALIFICATION KEATS AVE & HUDSON BLVD LAKE ELMO, MN SPACECO, INC. 9575 W. HIGGINS ROAD SUITE 700 ROSEMONT, IL 60018 License No. Date I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. VICINITY MAP Field Crew Henry D. Nelson - PLS 17255 Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No.15-401 HN JT/MS HN NL 12/03/15 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY 2 OF 2 SURVEY NOTES 1) BENCHMARKS: MnDOT Name: 8282 AX; GSID Station #100689; Located in Lake Elmo, 0.05 miles E along Hwy. 94 from junction of Hwy. 94 & Woodbury Dr. (Keats Ave. N.) in Lake Elmo, at Hwy. 94 mile point 251.75, 69.8 ft. N of westbound Hwy. 94 fog line, 1.5 ft. S of witness post. MnDOT Name: 8282 AF; GSID Station #33428; Located 2.0 miles NE of Woodbury at junction of Hwy. 94 & Co. Rd. 19, in top of railing at SE corner of Co. Rd. 19 Bridge No. 82844 over Hwy. 94, at Hwy. 94 mile point 251.65, 31 ft. NNW of end fence post, 24.8 ft. E of northbound Co. Rd. 19, 20.3 ft. N of S end of bridge railing, 8.6 ft. W of cyclone fence. 2) See Sheet 1 for boundary and easement details. SCALE IN FEET 0 100 200 12/03/15 DRAWING ISSUED 12/23/15 DRAWING REVISED 01/11/16 DRAWING REVISED 04/15/16 DRAWING REVISED 04/18/16 DRAWING REVISED   PAGE 1 of 3  MEMORANDUM         Date:  June 13, 2016      To:  Stephen Wensman, Planning Director  Re:  Meijer Concept Site Plan Review  Cc:  Emily Becker, City Planner      From:  Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer          We have received a Concept Site Plan for a proposed Meijer Supercenter to be located at the intersection of CSAH  19 (Keats Avenue) and 5th Street along the east side of CSAH 19 (Keats Avenue). The Concept Site Plan submittal  consisted of the following documentation:     Project Narrative undated (received June 1, 2016).   Concept Site Plan dated May 16, 2016, prepared by SPACECO, Inc.   ALTA Survey dated April 18, 2016, prepared by Loucks.      Engineering has the following review comments:    MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER   The applicant will be responsible to connect to City sewer and extend sewer fully across the applicant’s  property at applicant’s cost to provide sewer main stubs to all adjacent properties.    The proposed site is guided in the City’s Comprehensive Plan for Phase III of the Regional Sewer Staging  Plan. Therefore, municipal sanitary sewer is not readily available to  the site until municipal sewer  is  extended  west  from  Lake  Elmo  Avenue  and  Hudson  Boulevard  (MCES C o t t a g e  G r o v e  I n t e r c e p t o r   connection point).    The applicant will be responsible for extending sanitary sewer to the site at its cost in a manner that is  consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Sewer Plan.   Alternative sewer plans could be considered for interim service conditions at the time of development as  long as the ultimate discharge is to the MCES Cottage Grove Interceptor connection point and additional  sewer cost burdens are not placed on the City.   Sewer extension challenges for this property have been reviewed with the applicant and their engineer.   Any main sewer lines placed within the development will require minimum 30‐foot easements (or wider  dependent upon the sewer depths) dedicated to the City and in the form of the City’s Utility Easement  Agreement.     MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY   The  applicant  will  be  responsible  to  connect  to  City  water  and extend  water  across  the  applicant’s  property at applicant’s cost to provide watermain stubs to adjacent properties.    The applicant should be informed that the City water supply capacity (pressures, fire suppression, use)  may be limited until a new water tower is constructed to serve the City’s low pressure zone.   The proposed site is located in the water system’s low pressure zone. Water is available to be extended to  the property from the west side of CSAH 19 (Keats Avenue) which is located within an intermediate  pressure zone where the system pressures are transitioning from the high pressure zone. Development  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 3  on this site may require additional water system components (PRV valve, Elevated Tank #3) before the  water system for this property is able to function as designed.    The applicant will be responsible for extending municipal water to the site at its cost in a manner that is  consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Water Plan.   Alternative  water  service  plans  could  be  considered  for  interim s e r v i c e  c o n d i t i o n s  a t  t h e  t i m e  o f   development as long as additional water system cost burdens are not placed on the City.   The applicant has indicated that they may be required to construct both a fire pump and storage tank to  meet required fire flow demands for the development.   The City may require pipe sizes in excess of 8‐inch diameter pipe.  When requested, the City will pay  oversize costs for pipe sizes in excess of 8‐inch diameter.   The applicant must install a looped watermain network to avoid dead end runs greater than 600 feet.   The applicant will be responsible to place hydrants throughout the property at the direction of the Fire  Department.    Any watermain lines placed within the development will require minimum 30‐foot easements dedicated  to the City and in the form of the City’s Utility Easement Agreement.     STORMWATER MANAGEMENT   Stormwater  facilities  shall  be  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  listed  in  the  City  of  Lake  Elmo  Engineering Design Standards, in addition to the requirements of the Valley Branch Watershed District.   Stormwater facilities will likely need to include both storm water ponds (retention) and infiltration basins.  Infiltration basins should be shown as grass/vegetated areas (not shown as wet ponds) on the concept  plan to more accurately communicate the site plan to the public and review commissions.   The City will need to review the intended ownership, operation and ongoing maintenance responsibilities  of  the  proposed  stormwater  facilities.  If  City  owned,  the  facilities  should  be  placed  within  Outlots  dedicated to the City for maintenance purposes. The Outlots must fully incorporate the 100‐year HWL.    Maintenance access roads meeting the engineering design standards must be provided for all storm water  facilities.   The  applicant  will  be  required  to  execute  and  record  a  Stormwater  Maintenance  and  Easement  Agreement in the City’s standard form of agreement for any storm water facilities to be privately owned  and maintained.   The site is located within the Kraemer Lake subwatershed which is considered a landlocked basin. A  Regional Floodplain Study is therefore recommended to determine the increase in floodplain created by  Phase III development.    STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION     CSAH 19 (Keats Avenue) access spacing. The development access location along CSAH 19 (Keats Avenue)  appears to be properly located to align with the extension of the City’s collector street (5th Street). Specific  horizontal and vertical alignment details must be adhered to as the development moves forward to ready  this intersection for a signalized intersection control.   A Traffic Impact Study should be completed and submitted as part of the preliminary plat application to  determine the timing and extent of improvements required for the CSAH 19 and 5th Street intersection,  and  CSAH  19  and  Hudson  Boulevard  intersection;  including  but  not  limited  to  turn  lanes  and  traffic  signals.    5TH STREET. 5th Street seeks to become the backbone of future development along the I94 corridor,  essentially becoming the primary access in and out of the future neighborhoods. The street is required for  the  sole  purpose  to  support  the  growth  and  development  within  the  corridor  and  to  relief  traffic  congestion along Hudson Boulevard and 10th Street.   The plan indicates a minimum 100 foot R/W as required.   The proposed  2‐lane collector parkway street (5th Street) design and geometrics must meet all  Municipal State Aid design standards for urban streets (8820.9936) for ADT > 10,000; 40 mph    PAGE 3 of 3  design  speed;  and  must  be  consistent  with  the  detailed  parkway cross  section  installed  throughout the remaining corridor segments. The proposed alignment appears to be consistent  with this design intent.   Access  management  spacing  along  5th  Street  is  critical  to  the  performance  of  the  street  as  intended by the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Full access is allowed every 660 feet and  restricted access is allowed every 330 feet. The applicant is proposing a full access at 350 feet  which  should  be  denied.  The  access  at  350  feet  must  be  revised to  right‐in,  right‐out  by  constructing a center median across the access. The second access point is properly spaced for full  access at 720 feet.      Additional  streetscape  amenities  are  required  along  5th  Street consistent  with  the  5th  Street  Design Standards and remaining corridor segments. 5th Street Amenities include a 10 foot trail  along the north side, 6‐foot sidewalk on the south side, center landscape median with 2 ft. wide  concrete ribbon curb, boulevard trees, street lighting and site irrigation.   A public street access should be provided from 5th Street to the northerly adjacent property to avoid the  creation of landlocked parcels. A minimum 60 foot right‐of‐way is needed for residential property and 80  foot right‐of‐way for commercial property. The public access should be provided to the north at the full  intersection location (2nd access from CSAH 19) instead of a second access to the Convenience Station.   The City should review the site plan to determine trail connection requirements along Keats Avenue  and/or Hudson Boulevard.                               Memorandum DATE: 6-14-16 TO: Lake Elmo City Council FROM: Stephen Wensman, City Planner SUBJECT: OP Ordinance Update – Updated Draft for Discussion PURPOSE To update the City’s OP development codes to eliminate on-going issues (i.e. allowed density, required buffers, lot design, etc) and to ensure these developments are meeting the City’s expectations. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission reviewed an initial draft of this language in April, and Council examined a subsequent draft in early May. At Council’s direction, an updated draft was then prepared integrating Council’s feedback. Provided Council believes things are moving in the right direction, we would intend to use feedback from this meeting to draft a final ordinance that would go before the Planning Commission for a public hearing. APPROACH SUMMARY REVIEW Specific issues staff was asked to address with this update included but were not limited to:  Continue placing a focus on proper septic site locations to determine future lot locations, but maintain the current set of options (individual and communal options);  Give more options as to what could be done on Open Space land;  Add criteria for what buffers will be required;  Limit accessory structure height to 22’  Maintain 40 acre minimum before OP can be used;  Consider referencing new landscaping regulations;  Consider updates to hardcover regulations;  Change all references to an HOA to a CIC;  Provide for a slight increase in density by right (many have received waivers for up to 20 units per 40 acres);  Maintain open space requirements; Lake Elmo Council Meeting June 14, 2016 Page 2 of 3  Maintain 4/5 waiver voting requirement by Council;  Update street requirements per direction of the City Engineer;  Consider updating the process if necessary (i.e. transitioning to an overlay district rather than a CUP)  Remove redundancy found throughout the current regulations. WORKSHOP DIRECTION The following issues have been addressed in this updated draft:  The purpose statement was updated to stress the City’s intent to provide flexibility through this process (pg 1).  Options for minimum land area have been provided, and materials to assist Council with this decision have been included in the packet (pg 2).  Required super-majority votes for deviations have been eliminated in favor of standard PUD review criteria to determine if flexibilities being sought are in line with City goals (pgs 4 & 7).  The Comp Plan was re-examined, and staff has confirmed that a comp plan change will be necessary if Council would like to allow for greater density within open space PUDs (pg 4).  Required buffer language was updated as directed (pg 5).  Specific roadway standards were eliminated in favor of referencing the City’s standard engineering specifications & plates. Deviations from adopted standards would need to be justified through the PUD process (pg 6).  Minimum lot sizes have been restored to existing standards: 1 acre and ½ acre. (pg 6).  Clarification on how “buildable areas” are determined was added (pg 6).  All individual septic systems will now be required to be on private property outside of any easement areas (pg 8).  Existing language on “wetland treatment systems” was eliminated as directed (pg 8).  Optional landscaping standards that had been offered were eliminated in favor of existing standards (pg 9).  Open Space PUD review criteria have been updated to give Council a rational way to determine whether a proposal is achieving the City’s goals (pg 11).  Sketch plan review no longer includes a public hearing in front of the planning commission (although it will still go before the Planning Commission for review and comment) (pg 13).  Language regarding easements to be dedicated at with the Final Plan highlights that “buffers” may be something protected/created by an easement (pg 18). Lake Elmo Council Meeting June 14, 2016 Page 3 of 3 UPDATED DRAFT  The updated draft before Council continues to include comments in the margin to either explain the provisions being proposed, or highlight the changes that have been made. Comments highlighted in yellow have been updated or added since the last draft in May.  For your reference, we have also included a draft that utilizes underlines and strikeouts to show specific changes since May.  Note: Language in RED within the draft ordinance indicates language that must be added, amended, or still needs to be addressed. In preparation for the meeting on the 14th, we again ask that you to read through this draft and prepare questions for discussion ahead of time. Nothing is finalized, and feedback from Council will dictate the final ordinance to be assembled by staff. Thank you! Development Overall Acreage Lot Acreage Totals Open Space Acreage Open Space % of Buildable Land Number of Units Bluestem at Fields of St. Croix 9.6 0.56 6.998 92.59%14 Cardinal Ridge 37.9 14.419 20.104 58.23%17 Farms of Lake Elmo 79 26.171 47.557 64.50%30 The Fields of St. Croix 144.6 37.437 91.158 70.89%46 The Fields of St. Croix 2nd Addition 86.5 35.038 42.782 54.98%54 Hamlet on Sunfish Lake 90 29.723 53.627 64.34%41 Heritage Farm 99.4 50.31 50.61%46 Homestead 38.8 15.096 19.487 56.35%19 Meyer's Pine Ridge 50 21.78 23.017 51.38%21 Park View Estates 50*31 12.638 28.96%31 Prairie Hamlet 14.2 7.148 5.6 43.93%16 St. Croix's Sanctuary 121.1*51.32 84.771 62.29%62 Sunfish Ponds 40.2 12.945 28.26 68.58%16 Tamarack Farm Estates 37.8 13.242 21.079 61.42%13 Tana Ridge 33.4*15.337 13.29 46.42%20 Tapestry at Charlotte's Grove 157.1 75.292 66.31 46.83%70 Whistling Valley 54.2 21.74 29.81 57.83%19 Whistling Valley 2nd Addition 42.9 16.76 23.53 58.40%18 Whistling Valley 3rd Addition 14 6.01 7.39 55.15%5 Wildflower Shores 56.5 15.79 33.39 67.89%25 OP Development Acreage Totals** * not including park **Please note that these totals are approximate Data Source: Washington County Property Viewer Website Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan Chapter III – Land Use Plan This section of the Land Use chapter establishes the City’s official land use categories and the official Future Land Use Map. The map assigns planned land use types to all parcels within the community to guide current and future planning and development through the year 2030, and is the official land use designation map for the City. The assigned land use designations are intended to shape the character, type and density of future development according to sound planning principles. Any new development, redevelopment, change in land use or change in zoning is required to be consistent with the official land use guidance for each parcel. The official land use plan categories are 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] RESIDENTIAL ESTATE – This category defines areas developed specifically for large lot single family detached housing typically on 2+ acres of land. No new areas of residential estate are being established by the official land use plan. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): RE] RURAL SINGLE FAMILY – This category defines a large portion of the City that was historically platted for conventional subdivision prior to 2005, but has been and will continue to be serviced by private on-site well and septic systems. Limited locations within this classification are allowed to have two-family dwellings based on zoning. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): R-1, R-2] URBAN LOW DENSITY – The Urban Low Density land use category is intended primarily for single-family detached housing serviced by public sewer and water. This category allows net residential densities from two and one-half (2.5) to four (4) units per acre. Significant new areas of urban low density are guided both within the Old Village and along I-94. [Corresponding Zoning District: LDR] URBAN MEDIUM DENSITY – The Urban Medium Density land use category allows net residential densities from four and one-half (4.5) to seven (7) units per acre; with greater densities only allowed if deemed appropriate and approved through the PUD process and that meet incentives for density bonus as allowed under the PUD ordinance . This category allows for a variety of housing types including single-family detached, duplexes, townhomes, and small two- and three-story apartment buildings and/or senior living centers. Significant new areas of urban medium density are guided both within the Old Village and along I-94. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): R-3, MDR] URBAN HIGH DENSITY – The Urban High Density land use category is intended for higher density, compact urban residential development. This category allows for a net residential density range of seven and one-half (7.5) to fifteen (15) units per acre; however zoning may allow a greater net density if III – 8 Page 1 of 22 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL EXISTING OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 150, ADOPT NEW OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER 154, AND TO IMPLEMENT REFERENCE UPDATES IN CHAPTER 154 SECTION 1 (Will include definition updates if needed -- TBD) SECTION 2 (Will repeal existing OP codes in Chapter 150) SECTION 3 (Will replace existing OP codes in Chapter 150 with reserved language) i.e. “Sections 150.161 through 150.199 – RESERVED” SECTION 4 (Will clean up numerous existing problems with numbering in Chapter 154 to allow for placement of the new ordinance within zoning) SECTION 5 Will adopt the new Open Space Planned Unit Development Regulations as follows: Article XVI: OPEN SPACE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS § 154.650 PURPOSE. The purpose of open space planned unit developments is to maintain the rural character of Lake Elmo and development flexibility within rural portions of the community while still preserving agricultural land, woodlands, corridors, pollinator & wildlife habitat, and other significant natural features consistent with the goals and objectives of the city’s Comprehensive Plan. The City reserves the right to deny establishment of an open space PUD overlay district and direct a developer to re-apply under standard zoning provisions if it is determined that proposed benefits of the open space PUD do not justify the requested flexibilities. § 154.651 INTENT. It is the intent of the City of Lake Elmo that open space planned unit developments will offer needed development flexibility within the Agricultural, Rural Residential, and Rural Estate zoning districts to provide for: Commented [BGA1]: Section One will include all of the new or updated definitions to be adopted with this ordinance Commented [BGA2]: Because we are proposing a significant reorganization of the current regulations, the cleanest approach is to simply start with a clean slate. Section two of the ordinance will delete the current OP regulations in their entirety. Commented [BGA3]: Current OP regulations are housed in Chapter 150, but the more appropriate location (given the current code framework) is Chapter 154. This new ordinance will facilitate that move. Once complete, sections 150.161 through 150.199 will no longer exist. City Code should never skip over section numbers or readers are left wondering if they’re missing portions of the code. To address this problem, the existing OP section numbers will be marked with the word “reserved.” Commented [BGA4]: Placing the new OP language into Chapter 154 will require that we complete some general organizational clean up that is long overdue. This section will make sure that all Articles in Chapter 154 have numbers (some do not), and that existing Article numbers are updated to accommodate these new additions. Finally, all article references—and many references that currently point to nowhere or to incorrect sections—will also be updated. Commented [BGA5]: Section 5 of the ordinance will house all of the new language being adopted. Commented [BGA6]: This section simply states what the City is trying to accomplish when it reviews and approves “open space planned unit developments.” Commented [BGA7]: As requested, we have beefed up the purpose statement to stress the City’s intent to provide flexibility through this process. Commented [BGA8]: This section outlines specific things the City wants to accomplish with open space planned unit developments including allowing for a variety of housing types in the rural areas of the city, allowing for increased density, reducing infrastructure costs, protecting open space, and creating distinct but interconnected rural neighborhoods. Page 2 of 22 (A) A variety of lot configurations and housing styles that may not otherwise exist within the City’s rural areas; (B) An avenue to provide a development density equal to or greater than what could be achieved via underlying zoning; (C) A reduction in the costs to construct and maintain public facilities and infrastructure in a rural setting; (D) Protected open space to enhance and preserve the natural character of the community; and (E) The creation of distinct neighborhoods that are interconnected within rural areas. § 154.652 DEFINITIONS. Unless specifically defined in §§ 154.009 et seq., common definitions, words, and phrases used in §§ 154.009 et seq. shall be interpreted so as to give them the same meaning as they have in common usage throughout this code and are found in § 11.01. § 154.653 INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS. The owner of property on which an open space PUD is proposed shall file the applicable application for a PUD by paying the fee(s) set forth in _____ of this Code and submitting a completed application form and supporting documents as set forth on the application form and within this Section. Complete applications shall be reviewed by City Commissions as deemed necessary by the Director of Planning, including a public hearing before the Planning Commission, and be acted upon by the City Council. If a proposed PUD is denied, any subsequent application for a substantially similar PUD within one (1) year of the date of denial shall fully address all findings which supported the denial prior to being accepted as complete. § 154.654 REFLECTION ON THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP. (A) PUD provisions provide an optional method of regulating land use which permits flexibility from standard regulating provisions. Establishment of a PUD shall require adoption of an ordinance creating an overlay zoning district atop the boundaries of the development area. For each PUD District, a specific ordinance shall be adopted establishing all rules which shall supersede underlying zoning. Issues not specifically addressed by the PUD Overlay district shall be governed by the underlying zoning district regulations. (B) All Open Space Preservation developments approved prior to [date of ordinance publication] shall be allowed to continue per the original conditions of approval. § 154.655 PREREQUISITES FOR OPEN SPACE PUDs. (A) Only land zoned as Agricultural, Rural Residential, or Rural Estate may be considered for establishment of an open space planned unit development. (B) The minimum land area for establishment of an open space planned unit development is a nominal contiguous 20 acres. (C) Establishment of an open space planned unit development will be considered only for areas of land Commented [BGA9]: This section references 11.01 as the City’s location for applicable definitions. New definitions (or updated definitions) created by Section One of this ordinance will be placed in Section 11.01 Commented [BGA10]: This section simply outlines how a landowner can begin the open space PUD process. Commented [BGA11]: This is our first reference to the fact that OP regulations for each development will now be incorporated into an overlay district. Importantly, issues not addressed by the OP ordinance will be handled by underlying zoning regulations, so the City will never have to worry about missing details during the approval process. Commented [BGA12]: This section sets the minimum requirements that must be met before someone can request an Open Space PUD. The listed prerequisites are existing criteria. Page 3 of 22 in single ownership or control. Alternatively, multiple party ownership, in the sole discretion of the City, is acceptable when legally sufficient written consent from all persons and entities with ownership interest is provided at the time of application. § 154.656 USES WITHIN OPEN SPACE PUDs. (A) Primary Uses. (1) Permitted. (a) Single-family, detached; (b) Preserved open space; (c) Conservation easements; (d) Agriculture; (e) Suburban farms; (f) Private stables; (g) Single-family, attached; (h) Townhouses (no more than 25% in any development) (i) Wayside stand; and (j) Public parks and trails. (2) Conditionally Permitted. None (3) Interim Permitted. None (B) Accessory Uses. (1) Permitted. Uses deemed by the Director of Planning to be typically accessory to an established permitted use on the property as listed in 154.656(A)(1). (2) Conditionally Permitted. None (3) Interim Permitted. None (C) Prohibited Uses. All other uses not listed in 154.656(A)(1) or 154.656(A)(2) are hereby prohibited. Commented [BGA13]: Here we’ve maintained existing language. The only transition proposed is to allow the overlay district regulations to amend specific use provisions that may otherwise be in code. For example, if wayside stands are limited to one per lot, the overlay district regulations may specifically identify an area within preserved open space where up to three wayside stands may be erected at any point in time. The use has not changes, but the specific rules governing the use may be amended if deemed appropriate as part of the PUD approval. Commented [BGA14]: The Planning Commission had a split opinion on whether Townhomes should continue to be allowed in OP developments. Some felt townhomes were not appropriate in rural areas, while others felt they had been very successful in such developments to date and helped to created more open space than could otherwise be provided by all single family homes. Others pointed out that modern townhomes include detached units on zero setback “unit lots” which are surrounded by association owned and maintained property. Page 4 of 22 (D) Use Restrictions Adopted PUD overlay district regulations may include specific provisions governing uses which supersede the general regulations herein or that which may otherwise be required by underlying zoning. § 154.657 OPEN SPACE PUD DESIGN Open space PUDs shall comply with all of the following minimum design standards unless modifications are authorized by the City Council at the time of PUD Sketch Plan review. Authorization of such modifications resulting from a PUD Sketch Plan review shall not be construed as approvals for the change(s), but rather as an authorization to present such modifications as a component of the plan during the PUD Preliminary Plan review. (A) Density The maximum dwelling unit density within an open space planned unit development shall be 20 units per 40 acres of buildable land; however, the total number of dwelling units shall not exceed the density limitations contained in the Comprehensive Plan for Opens Space Preservation Development. (B) Lot Design Lot locations and configurations within open space planned unit developments shall be derived utilizing the following methodology. An applicant must be able to demonstrate how these steps resulted in the plan being proposed. (1) Soils Analysis Conducted A certified septic designer or soils scientist shall complete a review of the soils on the site, and categorize all areas as highly suitable for septic systems, moderately suitable for septic systems, or poorly suited for septic systems. (2) Septic Design Identification Based on the soils analysis, an applicant must identify whether the proposed development will be serviced by individual septic tanks and drain fields, or via a system of individual septic tanks which utilize one or more communal drain fields. (a) If individual septic tanks and drain fields can be supported by the available soils and is the chosen methodology to serve the development, all proposed lots must be able to provide primary and secondary drain field sites, and must meet a minimum lot size requirement as outlined herein. (b) If individual septic tanks which utilize communal drain fields is the chosen methodology to serve the development, then the location(s) for communal drain fields shall be identified within the area(s) deemed the most suitable on the site for supporting septic utilities according to the soils analysis. All such areas shall be clearly denoted on provided plan sets. Commented [BGA15]: This section will require ample examination as it completely reorganizes the City’s existing regulations governing lot design. As presented, the language is intended to ensure the City’s goals are met, and requires lots to be created utilizing the process pioneered by Randall Arendt in his book Rural by Design. While I believe that has always been the intent, the current guidance on lot design is unorganized, difficult to follow, and has no connection to how developers actually approach the creation of a development plan. What we’ve tried to accomplish in this section is to maintain the existing regulations (updated as requested and/or as necessary), but to structure them in a logical order that will result in the end product desired by the City. Commented [BGA16]: Super-majority vote requirement eliminated in favor of new review criteria in Section 154.660 Commented [BGA17]: As requested, staff double checked the language within the comprehensive plan. The current text reads: “Densities are allowed up to 0.45 dwelling units per buildable acre when planned as part of an Open Space Preservation development.” 40 acres * 0.45 d.u./acre = 18 units Regardless of how Council massages the density language in code to increase allowabl e units, it cannot be implemented until this comp plan language is also amended. Commented [BGA18]: Requiring a developer to analyze soils followed by choosing a septic design will actually achieve the City’s goal of ensuring proper septic design drives developments. Commented [BGA19]: The Planning Commission is recommending the City consider adopting a minimum number of units before a community septic system can be used. Based on some commissioner’s personal experiences, the number 40 was suggested as a potential starting point. If Council concurs with this recommendation, the City Engineer should be asked to provide guidance on an appropriate number. Page 5 of 22 (3) Identification of Required Buffers No build zones from each property boundary shall be derived as follows: (a) A two-hundred (200) foot buffer from all adjacent property lines that abut an existing residential development or a parcel of land not eligible for future development as an open space planned unit development due to insufficient parcel area. (b) A one-hundred (100) foot buffer from all adjacent property lines that abut land that is eligible for future development as an open space planned unit development. (c) If the development site is adjacent to an existing or approved OP development, the required buffer shall be equivalent to the buffer that was required of the adjacent development (see Section 154.659). (4) Identification of Preferred Building Pad Locations Building pad locations [up to the maximum number of units permitted by 154.657(A)] which preserve natural topography and drainageways (in as much as possible), minimizes tree loss, protects historic sites or structures, and limits the need for soil removal and/or grading shall then be identified. The orientation of individual building sites shall strive to maintain maximum natural topography and ground cover. (a) Building pads shall be located outside of required buffers, and shall be cited so as to provide ample room for accessory structures on future lots. (b) Whenever possible, building pads shall be oriented in small clusters often referred to as rural hamlets. (c) If individual septic tanks and drain fields for each lot are to be utilized, locations for primary and secondary facilities for each proposed building pad shall also be identified. Generalized locations for such may be shown during the PUD Sketch Plan phase, but all such sites must be verified as being viable as a component of PUD Preliminary Plan review. (d) If individual septic tanks utilizing communal drain fields is intended, the plan must clearly identify which communal drain field will service each of the proposed building pads. (5) Placement of Streets (a) Streets shall then be designed and located in such a manner as to: 1. Maintain and preserve natural topography, groundcover, significant landmarks, and trees; 2. Minimize cut and fill; 3. Preserve and enhance both internal and external views and vistas; 4. Promote road safety; 5. Assure adequate access for fire and rescue vehicles; and 6. Assure and promote adequate vehicular circulation both within the development and with adjacent neighborhoods. Commented [BGA20]: As currently constructed, subsections (a) and (b) are existing requirements. Subsection (c) is new, and states that if an adjacent OP development was granted lesser setbacks (see section 154.659), then that same lesser setback would apply in a new OP development. Subsection (d) is also new, and is intended to give the City Council full authority to reduce or eliminate buffers when conditions don’t require a buffer (i.e. topography provides a buffer, woodlands provide a visual barrier, etc). Commented [BGA21]: We slightly amended this language to state the full 100 foot buffer is only needed adjacent to land that could develop as another OP in the future. Subsection (c) then handles all buffers from existing or approved OP developments. Additionally, because deviations may be approved from any PUD development standard using the criteria in Section 154.660, we have eliminated the previous buffer language that allowed for the elimination of buffers altogether. Now Council will ask whether “the overall design provides appropriate solutions to eliminate adverse impacts” when considering buffer reductions, and/or when determining what can be done within buffers (something that can be specifically written into the overlay district ordinance governing the lots being created). Commented [BGA22]: Both staff and the planning commission are recommending striking this provision. Commented [BGA23]: Note that even up front, we will be requiring the developer to identify general locations that can accommodate primary and secondary septic sites. Detailed information would be needed during the Preliminary Plan stage. Page 6 of 22 (b) The design of streets and the dedication of right-of-way shall be in compliance with the City’s standard plates and specifications as may be amended. (c) Streets shall not encroach into a required buffer area unless it can be demonstrated that such an alignment is necessary to achieve the goals outlined above, and that no equivalent option exists outside of the buffer. Driving surfaces that cross the buffer area at a 90 degree angle to provide current or future access to an adjacent property or boundary road shall be the only exception. (6) Lot Creation Based on the street location(s), building pad locations, and septic system location(s); lines to delineate individual lots shall then be identified in accordance with the following: (a) Lot Size 1. Single-family lots being served by individual septic tanks and drain fields shall be a minimum of one (1) acre in size; 2. Single-family lots being served by individual septic tanks utilizing communal drain fields shall be a minimum of 1/2 acre (21,780 square feet) in size; 3. Base lots for townhomes shall be large enough such that individual unit lots can meet all required structure setbacks contained herein. (b) Buildable Area to be Shown 1. Buildable area on each proposed lot shall be shown. Buildable area shall exclude land within the following areas: a. Required buffers from adjacent lands [see section 154.657(3)] b. Steep slopes; c. Drainage swales; d. Easements; and e. Land within the following setbacks: HOUSING TYPE Additional Requirements Single Family Homes Townhomes Front Yard 30 20 xxx Side Yard 15 feet or 10% of lot width xxx Corner Lot Front Yard 30 xxx Corner Lot Side Yard 30 xxx Rear Yard 20 xxx Well from Septic Tank 50 xxx 2. Proposed buildable area on each lot shall be sufficient to accommodate primary and accessory structures that are normal and customary to the type of development being proposed. Commented [BGA24]: Rather than list allowable ROW widths and paved street widths, staff is recommending simply referring to the City’s standard plates and specifications. Again, if deviations are requested, the PUD review criteria will guide Council as to whether such deviations are warranted. We elected to stay silent on how signage can or cannot be used (i.e. no parking signs) to allow Council to make individual determinations depending upon the circumstances. Commented [BGA25]: We have amended this language to reinstitute the existing minimum lot sizes of one acre and one-half acre depending upon the septic system approach being used. Commented [BGA26]: This language was clarified to ensure developers understood what constituted buildable land on each lot. Commented [BGA27]: “Easements” assumes that all stormwater ponds, rain gardens, wetlands, etc. will be protected by easements. If not, those features will also need to be listed here. Page 7 of 22 (7) Open Space and Parkland Adjustments (a) Open Space 1. The total preserved open space area within an open space planned unit development shall be no less than 50% of the total gross land area, as defined by § 11.01. If this threshold is not achieved after following the first six steps of lot design, the proposed lot areas will need to be adjusted or lots eliminated until this requirement is met. 2. Not less than 60% of the preserved open space shall be in contiguous parcels which are ten (10) or more acres in size. 3. Preserved open space parcels shall be contiguous with preserved open space or public park land on adjacent parcels. (b) Parkland 1. Parks and recreational facilities shall be provided in addition to preserved open space as specified in the Lake Elmo Parks Plan. 2. Determination of whether a land or cash dedication will be required to fulfil parkland requirements will be at the discretion of the City Council, with direction to be provided as a component of PUD Sketch Plan review. If a required parkland dedication causes overall open space to drop below the minimum threshold, the proposed lot areas will need to be adjusted or lots eliminated until the open space requirement is once again met. 3. Any dedication shall be consistent with the dedication and fee-in-lieu standards specified in Chapter 153. § 154.658 OPEN SPACE PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Open space PUDs shall comply with all of the following development standards unless modifications are authorized by the City Council at the time of PUD Sketch Plan review. Authorization of such modifications resulting from a PUD Sketch Plan review shall not be construed as approvals for the change(s), but rather as an authorization to present such modifications as a component of the plan during the PUD Preliminary Plan review. (1) Preserved Open Space Standards (a) All preserved open space within an open space planned unit development shall be subject to a conservation easement and used for the purposes as defined by §§ 150.175 et seq. (b) Preserved open space land shall be controlled in one or more of following manners as determined at the sole discretion of the City Council: 1. Owned by an individual or legal entity who will use the land for preserved open space purposes as provided by permanent conservation restrictions (in accordance with M.S. Ch. 84C.01-.05, as it may be amended from time to time), to an acceptable land trust as approved by the city; and/or 2. Conveyed by conservation easement to the city. Commented [BGA28]: The overall seven (7) step design process we have laid out now both emphasizes what is important to the City while recognizing and embracing how a developer will approach the site anyway. At this final step, the developer may need to shrink lot sizes or eliminate lots to meet open space and parkland requirements. Commented [BGA29]: The open space provisions are existing requirements. The Planning Commission would like additional requirements or changes that would eliminate the use of thin strips of land to connect open spaces. A minimum dimension could be considered. Commented [BGA30]: Until we know what minimum land area will be authorized to apply for an open space PUD, we did not want to spend time trying to ascertain whether this standard needs to be amended. This will be addressed in the final version of the ordinance that goes before the planning commission. Commented [BGA31]: While Section 154.657 lays out the regulations that dictate how a development is laid out, Section 154.658 tells the applicant how the development must be constructed and improved. Here again we maintain the city’s existing development standards for open space developments (i.e. regulating open space, septic systems, building standards, landscaping standards, impervious surface standards, and trail standards). Commented [BGA32]: Super-majority vote requirement eliminated in favor of new review criteria in Section 154.660 Page 8 of 22 (c) Preserved open space land shall be maintained for the purposes for which it was set aside. If preserved open space was set aside for agricultural purposes or for natural habitat, a plan shall be submitted which will indicate how the land will be maintained or returned to a natural state and who will be responsible for plan implementation. Developers shall provide copies of common interest community (CIC) declarations to prospective purchasers, and conservation easements to the city, describing land management practices to be followed by the party or parties responsible for maintaining the preserved open space. (d) Where applicable, a Common Interest Community association shall be established to permanently maintain all residual open space and recreational facilities. The Common Interest Community association agreements, guaranteeing continuing maintenance, and giving lien right to the city if there is lack of the maintenance shall be submitted to the city as part of the documentation requirements of §§ 150.175 et seq. for a final plan. (2) Septic System Design Standards (a) In General All septic systems shall conform to the performance standards of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s standards for sewage treatment systems WPC-7080 and its appendices, or the M.P.C.A. standards in effect at the time of installation and septic system regulations of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code. (b) Individual Septic Drain fields Sites for individual septic drain fields, both primary and secondary, must be located entirely within each lot and cannot be located within any other easement. (c) Communal Drain Fields. a. Communal drain fields may be partially or completely located in an area designated as preserved open space provided: i. The ground cover is restored to its natural condition after installation; and ii. Recreational uses are prohibited above or within 50 feet of communal drain fields, or as approved by the City Engineer. b. Communal drain fields, if installed, shall be professionally maintained; and are acceptable once legally sufficient documentation has been provided by the developer to ensure such maintenance will continue in perpetuity. (3) Building Standards (a) Principal structures within open space planned unit developments shall not exceed 2 and ½ stories or 35 feet in height. (b) Accessory structures within open space planned unit developments shall not exceed 22 feet in height. Commented [BGA33]: The Planning Commission would like the City Attorney to provide guidance on proper lien language to protect against community septic systems from failing, and an HOA that is unwilling or unable to act. Commented [BGA34]: City staff will need to ensure these existing references are still accurate based on how the City current regulates septic systems. Does Washington County need to be referenced? Commented [BGA35]: This new requirements would mandate that all individual septic systems be located on private property. Commented [BGA36]: Existing language regarding wetland treatment systems has been eliminated as directed. The new ordinance would be silent on such systems, and Engineering would be looked at for guidance if such a system is proposed in the future. Commented [BGA37]: The Planning Commission questioned whether we should specifically exclude historic structures from this requirement. Staff would say “no.” Historic structures taller than 22 feet would be legal nonconforming structures subject to protections of State Statute. We strongly recommend not creating special provisions based on the age of a building. Page 9 of 22 (c) It is desired that the structures within neighborhoods convey a particular architectural style with similar building components, materials, roof pitches. The PUD Overlay ordinance crafted for each individual development should establish minimum architectural standards for the neighborhood. (4) Landscaping Standards (a) A landscape plan for the entire site is required and shall consist of at least 10 trees per building site; and trees shall not be not less than 1.5 inch in caliper measured at 54 inches above grade level. (b) Boulevard landscaping is required along all streets to consist of at least 1 tree per every 30 feet or placed in clusters at the same ratio. (5) Impervious Surface Standards (still needs work) The maximum impervious surface allowable within an open space planned unit development shall be 20% of the land area not dedicated as preserved open space subject to the following: (a) Impervious surfaces created by roads, trails, and other planned impervious improvements shall count against the maximum allowed impervious coverage. (b) Remaining allowed impervious surface acreage may be distributed between the planned building sites, and maximums for each lot shall be clearly documented within the overlay district ordinance governing the development. (c) On individual lots, areas covered by pervious pavers or comparable systems may receive a 25% credit against the lot’s hardcover if the system is installed consistent with the City of Lake Elmo Engineering Standards Manual, and adequate storm water mitigation measures (as may be necessary) are installed to mitigate potential runoff created by the additional coverage above the allowed impervious surface threshold. All such credits shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer. (6) Trail Standards A trail system or sidewalks shall be established within open space planned unit developments in accordance with the following: (a) The linear footage of trails provided shall be at least equal in length to the sum of the centerline length of all public roads within the development. (b) All trails shall be constructed of asphalt or concrete in compliance with the standard city design plate for trails. (c) Proposed trails shall provide connections between and access to the buildable land areas and preserved open space land being created by the development. (d) Proposed trails shall connect to existing, planned, or anticipated trails or roads on adjacent parcels. (e) If applicable, trails shall be linked (or be designed to provide a future link) to the “Old Village” to emphasize the connection between existing and new development. Commented [BGA38]: As directed, the optional landscaping standards have been eliminated in favor of the existing standards. Commented [BGA39]: This standard will be looked at in the future. Commented [BGA40]: The “pathway” standards that are currently lumped into a single paragraph are now broken apart in this new ordinance. Commented [BGA41]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 3 Commented [BGA42]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 4 Commented [BGA43]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 1 Commented [BGA44]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 1 Commented [BGA45]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 2 Page 10 of 22 § 154.659 BUFFER SETBACKS IN OP DEVELOPMENTS Buffer setbacks shall be applied from the edge of the existing open space preservation developments as follows. Buffer Setbacks in OP Developments (in feet) North Edge South Edge West Edge East Edge Exception Parcel(s) St. Croix’s Sanctuary 200 50 50 100 Discover Crossing 200 100 50 100 Whistling Valley I 25 200 N/A N/A Whistling Valley 1I 25 100 85 N/A Whistling Valley III 50 100 100 N/A Farms of Lake Elmo 100 50 100 25 Prairie Hamlet 200 50 50 100 Fields of St. Croix I 50 N/A 200 100 Fields of St. Croix 1I N/A 200 200 N/A N/A The Homestead 50 50 200 50 Tapestry at Charlotte’s Grove 50 50 200 50 100 Tamarack Farm Estates 100 100 100 100 Sunfish Ponds 100 100 100 200 Hamlet on Sunfish Lake 50 100 50 50 Cardinal Ridge 100 200 50 50 Wildflower Shoves 100 200 100 200 Heritage Farms 50 N/A N/A 50 N/A Tana Ridge (Res. 2009-033) N/A N/A 50 50 Parkview Estates (Res. 2009-033) 50; except Lot 9, Block 5 use 20 ft N/A N/A 50 Commented [BGA46]: This Section will likely need to be relocated to a more appropriate location in Chapter 154, but is included here as a place-holder for now. Page 11 of 22 § 154.660 OPEN SPACE PUD REVIEW CRITERIA The following findings shall be made by the City Council prior to approval of a new or amended open space planned unit development: (1) The proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. (2) All prerequisites for an open space PUD as outlined in § 154.655 are met. (3) All open space PUD design standards (as outlined in § 154.657) and all open space development standards (as outlined in § 154.658) are met; or if deviations are proposed, that all such deviations are supported because: a. The deviation(s) allow for quality building and site design that will enhance aesthetics of the site; b. The deviation(s) help to create a unified environment within the project boundaries by ensuring one or more of the following: architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, enhanced landscaping and site features, and/or efficient use of utilities; c. The overall design provides appropriate solutions to eliminate adverse impacts that proposed deviations may impose on surrounding lands. (4) If the proposed PUD involves construction over two or more phases, the applicant has demonstrated that each phase is capable of being a stand-alone development independent of other phases. § 154.661 OPEN SPACE PUD REVIEW PROCEDURE All requests to establish an open space Planned Unit Development shall be initiated by following the steps below. (1) Open Space PUD Sketch Plan (a) Purpose The open space PUD Sketch Plan is the first step in the development process which gives the applicant an opportunity to present their ideas to the City Council and public so as to gain general feedback on areas that will require additional analysis, study, design, changes, etc. Feedback gained during the open space PUD Sketch Plan phase should be addressed within the subsequent PUD Preliminary Plan. (b) Specific open space PUD Sketch Plan Submittal Requirements Except as may be waived by the Director of Planning, the following information shall constitute a complete application for an open space PUD Sketch Plan. 1. A listing of contact information including name(s), address(es) and phone number(s) of: the owner of record, authorized agents or representatives, engineer, surveyor, and any other relevant associates; Commented [BGA47]: Lists the questions the City will ask when reviewing these types of developments. These criteria have been updated since the last review by Council in response to the super-majority vote for deviations being removed. Rather than keeping such decision-making open- ended, we are proposing a set of criteria (in subdivision 3) by which Council may judge proposed deviations: 1) Do the deviations allow for a quality design that enhances the aesthetics of the site? 2)Do the deviations help to tie the development together to achieve one or more of the listed benefits? 3)Does the site design include appropriate solutions to mitigate adverse impacts of the proposed deviation? By including a framework for decision making on deviations, we eliminate some of the subjectivity that can arise as PUDs are reviewed. Additional criteria can be added as Council may see fit. We have also added subdivision 4 which introduces a new review criteria requiring that phased developments result in pieces that can stand-alone should the development go belly-up prior to completion. Commented [BGA48]: This lengthy section outlines the process to be used to review open space PUDs from beginning to end. In general, this current draft follows the standard City platting process with specific PUD requirements thrown in. Boiled down to its core, the review will require a sketch plan proposal, a preliminary plan, and then a final plan. Page 12 of 22 2. A listing of the following site data: Address, current zoning, parcel size in acres and square feet and current legal description(s); 3. A narrative explaining the applicant’s proposed objectives for the open space PUD, a listing of the proposed modifications from standard in § 154.657 as may be applicable, and an explanation of how the proposal addresses the PUD review criteria in § 154.660. 4. A listing of general information including the following: a. Number of proposed residential units. b. Calculation of the proposed density of the project showing compliance with § 154.657(A). c. A listing of all proposed land uses (i.e. preserved open space, buildable sites, parkland, etc). d. Square footages of land dedicated to each proposed land use. 5. An existing conditions exhibit, including topography, that identifies the location of the following environmental features along with calculations (in acres) for each: a. Gross site acreage; b. Existing wetlands; c. Existing woodlands; d. Areas with slopes greater than 12%, but less than 25%; e. Areas with slopes of 25% or greater; f. Woodlands; g. Other pertinent land cover(s). 6. An open space PUD Sketch Plan illustrating the nature of the proposed development. At a minimum, the plan should show: a. Existing zoning district(s) on the subject land and all adjacent parcels; b. Layout of proposed lots and proposed uses denoting Outlots planned for public dedication and/or preserved open space; c. Area calculations for each parcel; d. General location of wetlands and/or watercourses over the property and within 200 feet of the perimeter of the subdivision parcel; e. Location of existing and proposed streets within and immediately adjacent to the subdivision parcel; f. Proposed sidewalks and trails; g. Proposed parking areas; Page 13 of 22 h. General location of wooded areas or significant features (environmental, historical, cultural) of the parcel; i. Location of utility systems that will serve the property; j. Calculations for the following: i. Gross land area (in acres); ii. Number of proposed residential units. iii. Proposed density of the project showing compliance with § 154.657(A). iv. Acreage & square footage of land dedicated to each proposed land use (i.e. preserved open space, buildable sites, parkland, etc). v. Acreage & square footage of land proposed for public road right-of-way; vi. Acreage & square footage of land dedicated to drainage ways and ponding areas; vii. Acreage & square footage of land for Trails and/or sidewalks (if outside of proposed road right-of-way); k. Other: An applicant may submit any additional information that may explain the proposed PUD or support any requests for modifications (i.e. a landscaping plan to support the lessening or elimination of an otherwise required buffer). 7. The outline of a conceptual development schedule indicating the approximate date when construction of the project, or stages of the same, can be expected to begin and be completed (including the proposed phasing of construction of public improvements and recreational & common space areas). 8. A statement of intent to establish a Common Interest Community association with bylaws and deed restrictions to include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Ownership, management, and maintenance of defined preserved open space; b. Maintenance of public and private utilities; and c. General architectural guidelines for principal and accessory structures. 9. If applicable, a historic preservation plan for any historic structures on the site shall be submitted. (c) Open Space PUD Sketch Plan Proposal Review 1. Planning Commission a. Upon receiving an open space PUD Sketch Plan proposal, the City shall schedule a date upon which the Planning Commission will review the proposal. b. Upon completing their review, the Planning Commission shall adopt findings and recommendations on the proposed open space PUD as soon as practical. Commented [BGA49]: The need for a sketch plan public hearing before the Planning Commission was eliminated as requested. Page 14 of 22 c. The Director of Planning may forward an application to the City Council without a recommendation from the Planning Commission only if it is deemed necessary to ensure compliance with state mandated deadlines for application review. 2. City Council a. The City Council may listen to comments on the proposed development if they deem such necessary prior to taking action on the proposed open space PUD Sketch plan. b. After consideration of the Director of Planning’s recommendation, the Planning Commission recommendation, and the comments received at the public hearing, the City Council may comment on the merit of the request, needed changes, and suggested conditions that the proposer should adhere to with any future application. c. For each of the identified modifications to the minimum standards outlined in § 154.657, the City Council shall take a vote to instruct the applicant as to whether the modification can be pursued as a component of the PUD Preliminary Plan review. The ability to pursue approval of modified standards may only be authorized via a super-majority vote of the City Council. (d) Effect of a PUD Sketch Plan Review The City Council and Planning Commission’s comments during the PUD Sketch Plan review are explicitly not an approval or denial of the project, and are intended only to provide information for the applicant to consider prior to application for an open space PUD Preliminary Plan. (e) Limitation of Approval The City Council’s review of an open space PUD Sketch Plan shall remain valid for a period of six (6) months. The City Council, in its sole discretion, may extend the validity of their findings for an additional year. (2) PUD Preliminary Plan (a) Prerequisite No application for an open space PUD Preliminary Plan will be accepted unless a distinctly similar proposal has completed the open space PUD Sketch Plan review process which is valid upon the date of application. Commented [BGA50]: Under this process, Council would take individual votes on each modification proposed by the applicant. Approval at this stage ONLY authorizes the applicant to make the request at the Preliminary stage; it does NOT grant any rights to the modification. Again, modifications can only be pursued IF Council allows such via a super majority vote. Commented [BGA51]: This subsection clarifies EXACTLY what a developer gets as a result of the sketch plan process. Commented [BGA52]: Sketch Plan reviews may remain valid for up to 1.5 years. Commented [BGA53]: The City will not accept a preliminary plan application unless a valid sketch plan is in place. Page 15 of 22 (b) PUD Preliminary Plan Submittal Requirements Except as may be waived by the Director of Planning, the following information shall constitute a complete application for an open space PUD Preliminary Plan. 1. All required information for a preliminary plat per Chapter 1102, Section 1102.01(C) and Section 1102.02. 2. A written summary of the required Developer Open House meeting as required by Chapter 1102, Section 1102.01(B)(5). 3. A separate open space PUD Preliminary Plan which includes the following information: a. Administrative information (including identification of the drawing as an “Open Space PUD Preliminary Plan,” the proposed name of the project, contact information for the developer and individual preparing the plan, signature of the surveyor and civil engineer certifying the document, date of plan preparation or revision, and a graphic scale and north arrow); b. Area calculations for gross land area, wetland areas, right-of-way dedications, and proposed public and private parks or open space; c. Existing zoning district(s) on the subject land and all adjacent parcels; d. Layout of proposed lots with future lot and block numbers. The perimeter boundary line of the subdivision should be distinguishable from the other property lines. Denote Outlots planned for public dedication and/or open space (schools, parks, etc.); e. The location of proposed septic disposal area(s); f. Area calculations for each parcel; g. Proposed setbacks on each lot (forming the building pad) and calculated buildable area; h. Proposed gross hardcover allowance per lot (if applicable); i. Existing contours at intervals of two feet. Contours must extend a minimum of 200 feet beyond the boundary of the parcel(s) in question; j. Delineation of wetlands and/or watercourses over the property; k. Delineation of the ordinary high water levels of all water bodies; l. Location, width, and names of existing and proposed streets within and immediately adjacent to the subdivision parcel; m. Easements and rights-of-way within or adjacent to the subdivision parcel(s); n. The location and orientation of proposed buildings; o. Proposed sidewalks and trails; Page 16 of 22 p. Vehicular circulation system showing location and dimension for all driveways, parking spaces, parking lot aisles, service roads, loading areas, fire lanes, emergency access, if necessary, public and private streets, alleys, sidewalks, bike paths, direction of traffic flow and traffic control devices; q. Lighting location, style and mounting and light distribution plan. r. Proposed parks, common areas, and preservation easements (indicate public vs. private if applicable); s. Location, access and screening detail of large trash handling and recycling collection areas 4. Colored renderings which detail the building materials being used and clearly communicate the look and design of the proposed building(s); 5. Proposed architectural and performance standards for the development; 6. A grading drainage and erosion control plan prepared by a registered professional engineer providing all information as required by Public Works, the City Engineer, and/or the Director of Planning; 7. A utility plan providing all information as required by Public Works, the City Engineer, and/or the Director of Planning; 8. Results of deep soil test pits and percolation tests, at the rate of no fewer than 2 successful test results for each proposed septic disposal area; 9. A landscape plan, including preliminary sketches of how the landscaping will look, prepared by a qualified professional providing all information outlined in Section <insert applicable section here> ; 10. A tree preservation plan as required by Section <insert applicable section here>; 11. The location and detail of signage providing all pertinent information necessary to determine compliance with Section <insert applicable section here>; 12. A traffic study containing, at a minimum, the total and peak hour trip generation from the site at full development, and the effect of such traffic on the level of service of nearby and adjacent streets, intersections, and total parking requirements; 13. A plan sheet or narrative clearly delineating all features being modified from standard open space PUD regulations; 14. Common Interest Community Association documents including bylaws, deed restrictions, covenants, and proposed conservation easements. 15. Any other information as directed by the Director of Planning. Page 17 of 22 (c) PUD Preliminary Plan Review 1. As part of the review process for an open space PUD Preliminary Plan, the Director of Planning shall generate an analysis of the proposal against the expectations for PUDs, and make a recommendation regarding the proposed overlay district for Planning Commission and City Council consideration. 2. The Director of Planning shall prepare a draft ordinance to establish the potential overlay district to be established as a component of the PUD Final Plan. 3. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearin g and consider the application’s consistency with the goals for PUDs, the PUD review criteria, and applicable comprehensive plan goals. The Planning Commission shall make recommendations to the City Council on the merit, needed changes, and suggested conditions to impose on the PUD. 4. In approving or denying the PUD Preliminary Plan, the City Council shall make findings on the PUD review criteria outlined in Section 1023.08. 5. As a condition of PUD Preliminary Plan approval; finalization, adoption, and publication of an overlay district ordinance shall need to occur prior to the filing of any future final plat. (d) Effect of a PUD Preliminary Plan Review Preliminary Plan approval governs the preparation of the PUD Final Plan which must be submitted for final approval in accordance with the requirements of this Article. (e) Limitation of Approval The City Council’s review of an open space PUD Preliminary Plan shall remain valid for a period of one (1) year. The City Council, in its sole discretion, may extend the validity of their findings for an additional year. (3) PUD Final Plan (a) Application Deadline Application for an open space PUD Final Plan shall be submitted for approval within ninety (90) days of City Council approval of the open space PUD Preliminary Plan unless a written request for a time extension is submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council. Commented [BGA54]: Rather than allowing the applicant to draft an overlay district, we are proposing that staff begin the process at preliminary plan. The cost for this work will need to be incorporated into the fee for a Preliminary Plan application. Note that staff will ONLY be creating a draft now for feedback and direction. The actual code language will be reviewed during the Final Plan phase. Commented [BGA55]: This subsection clarifies EXACTLY what a developer gets as a result of the Preliminary Plan process. Commented [BGA56]: Preliminary Plan approvals may remain valid for up to 2.0 years. Commented [BGA57]: To ensure the process continues to move forward, we are recommending a 90 day time-frame in which the final plan application must be submitted. Page 18 of 22 (b) PUD Final Plan Submittal Requirements Except as may be waived by the Director of Planning, the following information shall constitute a complete application for an open space PUD Final Plan. 1. All required information for a final plat per <insert applicable section here>; 2. All required PUD Preliminary Plan documents, other than the preliminary plat, shall be updated to incorporate and address all conditions of PUD Preliminary Plan approval. 3. Any deed restrictions, covenants, agreements, and articles of incorporation and bylaws of any proposed homeowners’ association or other documents or contracts which control the use or maintenance of property covered by the PUD. 4. A final staging plan, if staging is proposed, indicating the geographical sequence and timing of development, including the estimated start and completion date for each stage. 5. Up-to-date title evidence for the subject property in a form acceptable to the Director of Planning. 6. Warranty deeds for Property being dedicated to the City for all parks, Outlots, etc., free from all liens and encumbrances. 7. All easement dedication documents for easements not shown on the final plat including those for trails, ingress/egress, buffer establishment, etc., together with all necessary consents to the easement by existing encumbrancers of the property. 8. Any other information deemed necessary by the Director of Planning to fully present the intention and character of the open space PUD. 9. If certain land areas or structures within the open space PUD are designated for recreational use, public plazas, open areas or service facilities, the owner of such land and buildings shall provide a plan to the city that ensures the continued operation and maintenance of such areas or facilities in a manner suitable to the city. (c) PUD Final Plan Review 1. The Director of Planning shall generate an analysis of the final documents against the conditions of the open space PUD Preliminary Plan approval, and make a recommendation as to whether all conditions have been met or if additional changes are needed. 2. Staff should once again identify any information submittals that were waived so Council may determine if such is needed prior to making a final decision. 3. The Director of Planning shall finalize the ordinance to establish the proposed overlay district for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. Commented [BGA58]: Here we denote that easements may be created to memorialize buffer areas on individual lots. Page 19 of 22 4. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the proposed Overlay District ordinance and open space Final PUD Plans, and shall submit a recommendation to the City Council for consideration. Because an open space PUD Preliminary Plan was previously approved, the Planning Commission’s recommendation shall only focus on whether the Ordinance and open space PUD Final Plan are in substantial compliance with the open space PUD Preliminary Plan and the required conditions of approval. 5. The City Council shall then consider the recommendations of the Director of Planning, the public, and the Planning Commission; and make a decision of approval or denial, in whole or in part, on the open space PUD Final Plan. A denial shall only be based on findings that an open space PUD Final Plan is not in substantial compliance with the approved open space PUD Preliminary Plan and/or the required conditions of approval. 6. As a condition of PUD Final Plan approval, publication of the overlay district ordinance shall be required prior to filing of the approved final plat. 7. Planned Unit Development Agreement. a. At its sole discretion, the City may as a condition of approval, require the owner and developer of the proposed open space PUD to execute a development agreement which may include but not be limited to all requirements of the open space PUD Final Plan. b. The development agreement may require the developers to provide an irrevocable letter of credit in favor of the City. The letter of credit shall be provided by a financial institution licensed in the state and acceptable to the City. The City may require that certain provisions and conditions of the development agreement be stated in the letter of credit. The letter of credit shall be in an amount sufficient to ensure the provision or development of improvement called for by the development agreement. 8. As directed by the City, documents related to the PUD shall be recorded against the property. Commented [BGA59]: Unlike most platting processes, we must hold a public hearing at this point in the process as the City must adopt the final ordinance language that will govern the PUD. Page 20 of 22 (d) Time Limit 1. A Planned Unit Development shall be validated by the a pplicant through the commencement of any necessary construction or establishment of the authorized use(s), subject to the permit requirements of Title 9 of this Code, in support of the Planned Unit Development within one (1) year of the date of open space PUD Final Plan approval. Failure to meet this deadline shall render the open space PUD Final Plan approval void. Notwithstanding this time limitation, the City Council may approve extensions of the time allowed for validation of the Planned Unit Development approval if requested in writing by the applicant; extension requests shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and shall identify the reason(s) why the extension is necessary along with an anticipated timeline for validation of the Planned Unit Development. 2. An application to reinstate an open space PUD that was voided for not meeting the required time limit shall be administered in the same manner as a new open space PUD beginning at open space PUD Preliminary Plan. § 154.662 OPEN SPACE PUD AMENDMENTS Approved open space PUDs may be amended from time to time as a result of unforeseen circumstances, overlooked opportunities, or requests from a developer or neighborhood. At such a time, the applicant shall make an application to the city for an open space PUD amendment. (A) Amendments to Existing Open Space PUD Overlay District(s) Amendments to an approved open space PUD Overlay district shall be processed as one of the following: (1) Administrative Amendment The Director of Planning may approve minor changes in the location, placement, and height of buildings if such changes are required by engineering or other circumstances, provided the changes conform to the approved overlay district intent and are consistent with all requirements of the open space PUD ordinance. Under no circumstances shall an administrative amendment allow additional stories to buildings, additional lots, or changes to designated uses established as part of the PUD. An Administrative Amendment shall be memorialized via letter signed by the Community Development Director and recorded against the PUD property. Commented [BGA60]: This section will deal with how the City will process amendments to both open space PUDs and existing OP developments. Page 21 of 22 (2) Ordinance Amendment A PUD change requiring a text update to the adopted open space PUD overlay district language shall be administered in accordance with adopted regulations for zoning code changes in Section xxx. Ordinance amendments shall be limited to changes that are deemed by the Director of Planning to be consistent with the intent of the original open space PUD approval, but are technically necessary due to construction of the adopted overlay district language. (3) PUD Amendment Any change not qualifying for an administrative amendment or an Ordinance amendment shall require an open space PUD amendment. An application to amend an open space PUD shall be administered in the same manner as that required for a new PUD beginning at open space PUD Preliminary Plan. (B) Pre-existing OP Developments (work in progress) Pre-existing OP developments authorized prior to [date this ordinance is effective] shall continue to be governed per the original conditions of approval until the OP development is cancelled by the City, or the OP development is converted to an open space PUD overlay district. An application to amend an existing OP development shall be administered in the same manner as that required for a new open space PUD beginning at open space PUD Preliminary Plan. § 154.663 PUD CANCELLATION An open space PUD shall only be cancelled and revoked upon the City Council adopting an ordinance rescinding the overlay district establishing the PUD. Cancellation of a PUD shall include findings that demonstrate that the PUD is no longer necessary due to changes in local regulations over time; is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan or other application land use regulations; threatens public safety, health, or welfare; or other applicable findings in accordance with law. § 154.664 ADMINISTRATION In general, the following rules shall apply to all open space PUDs: (A) Rules and regulations No requirement outlined in the open space PUD review process shall restrict the City Council from taking action on an application if necessary to meet state mandated time deadlines; Commented [BGA61]: This section will be written if these amendments continue to move forward. Commented [BGA62]: This section outlines the process for cancelling a previous PUD approval. Commented [BGA63]: This section includes some final rules and regulations deemed important by staff. Page 22 of 22 (B) Preconstruction No building permit shall be granted for any building on land for which an open space PUD plan is in the process of review, unless the proposed building is allowed under the existing zoning and will not impact, influence, or interfere with the proposed open space PUD plan. (C) Effect on Conveyed Property In the event that any real property in an approved open space PUD is conveyed in total, or in part, the new owners thereof shall be bound by the provisions of the approved overlay district. SECTION 6 (Will update the list of overlay districts in Chapter 154 to include the Open Space Planned Unit Development Overlay District) Page 1 of 23 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL EXISTING OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 150, ADOPT NEW OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER 154, AND TO IMPLEMENT REFERENCE UPDATES IN CHAPTER 154 SECTION 1 (Will include definition updates if needed -- TBD) SECTION 2 (Will repeal existing OP codes in Chapter 150) SECTION 3 (Will replace existing OP codes in Chapter 150 with reserved language) i.e. “Sections 150.161 through 150.199 – RESERVED” SECTION 4 (Will clean up numerous existing problems with numbering in Chapter 154 to allow for placement of the new ordinance within zoning) SECTION 5 Will adopt the new Open Space Planned Unit Development Regulations as follows: Article XVI: OPEN SPACE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS § 154.650 PURPOSE. The purpose of open space planned unit developments is to maintain the rural character of Lake Elmo byand provide greater development flexibility within rural portions of the community while still preserving agricultural land, woodlands, corridors, pollinator & wildlife habitat, and other significant natural features; while still allowing for residential development consistent with the goals and objectives of the city’s Comprehensive Plan. The City reserves the right to deny establishment of an open space PUD overlay district and direct a developer to re-apply under standard zoning provisions if it is determined that proposed benefits of the open space PUD do not justify the requested flexibilities. § 154.651 INTENT. It is the intent of the City of Lake Elmo that open space planned unit developments will offer needed development flexibility within the Agricultural, Rural Residential, and Rural Estate zoning districts to Commented [BGA1]: Section One will include all of the new or updated definitions to be adopted with this ordinance Commented [BGA2]: Because we are proposing a significant reorganization of the current regulations, the cleanest approach is to simply start with a clean slate. Section two of the ordinance will delete the current OP regulations in their entirety. Commented [BGA3]: Current OP regulations are housed in Chapter 150, but the more appropriate location (given the current code framework) is Chapter 154. This new ordinance will facilitate that move. Once complete, sections 150.161 through 150.199 will no longer exist. City Code should never skip over section numbers or readers are left wondering if they’re missing portions of the code. To address this problem, the existing OP section numbers will be marked with the word “reserved.” Commented [BGA4]: Placing the new OP language into Chapter 154 will require that we complete some general organizational clean up that is long overdue. This section will make sure that all Articles in Chapter 154 have numbers (some do not), and that existing Article numbers are updated to accommodate these new additions. Finally, all article references—and many references that currently point to nowhere or to incorrect sections—will also be updated. Commented [BGA5]: Section 5 of the ordinance will house all of the new language being adopted. Commented [BGA6]: This section simply states what the City is trying to accomplish when it reviews and approves “open space planned unit developments.” Commented [BGA7]: As requested, we have beefed up the purpose statement to stress the City’s intent to provide flexibility through this process. Commented [BGA8]: This section outlines specific things the City wants to accomplish with open space planned unit developments including allowing for a variety of housing types in the rural areas of the city, allowing for increased density, reducing infrastructure costs, protecting open space, and creating distinct but interconnected rural neighborhoods. Page 2 of 23 provide for: (A) A variety of lot configurations and housing styles that may not otherwise exist within the City’s rural areas; (D)(C) A reduction in the costs to construct and maintain public facilities and infrastructure in a rural setting; (E)(D) Protected open space to enhance and preserve the natural character of the community; and (F)(E) The creation of distinct neighborhoods that are interconnected within rural areas. § 154.652 DEFINITIONS. Unless specifically defined in §§ 154.009 et seq., common definitions, words, and phrases used in §§ 154.009 et seq. shall be interpreted so as to give them the same meaning as they have in common usage throughout this code and are found in § 11.01. § 154.653 INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS. The owner of property on which an open space PUD is proposed shall file the applicable application for a PUD by paying the fee(s) set forth in _____ of this Code and submitting a completed application form and supporting documents as set forth on the application form and within this Section. Complete applications shall be reviewed by City Commissions as deemed necessary by the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning, including a public hearing before the Planning Commission, and be acted upon by the City Council. If a proposed PUD is denied, any subsequent application for a substantially similar PUD within one (1) year of the date of denial shall fully address all findings which supported the denial prior to being accepted as complete. § 154.654 REFLECTION ON THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP. (A) PUD provisions provide an optional method of regulating land use which permits flexibility from standard regulating provisions. Establishment of a PUD shall require adoption of an ordinance creating an overlay zoning district atop the boundaries of the development area. For each PUD District, a specific ordinance shall be adopted establishing all rules which shall supersede underlying zoning. Issues not specifically addressed by the PUD Overlay district shall be governed by the underlying zoning district regulations. (B) All Open Space Preservation developments approved prior to [date of ordinance publication] shall be allowed to continue per the original conditions of approval. § 154.655 PREREQUISITES FOR OPEN SPACE PUDs. (A) Only land zoned as Agricultural, Rural Residential, or Rural Estate may be considered for establishment of an open space planned unit development. (B) The minimum land area for establishment of an open space planned unit development is a nominal Commented [BGA9]: This section references 11.01 as the City’s location for applicable definitions. New definitions (or updated definitions) created by Section One of this ordinance will be placed in Section 11.01 Commented [BGA10]: This section simply outlines how a landowner can begin the open space PUD process. Commented [BGA11]: This is our first reference to the fact that OP regulations for each development will now be incorporated into an overlay district. Importantly, issues not addressed by the OP ordinance will be handled by underlying zoning regulations, so the City will never have to worry about missing details during the approval process. Commented [BGA12]: This section sets the minimum requirements that must be met before someone can request an Open Space PUD. The listed prerequisites are existing criteria. Page 3 of 23 contiguous (40, 30, 20, 10) acres. § 154.656 USES WITHIN OPEN SPACE PUDs. (A) Primary Uses. (1) Permitted. (a) Single-family, detached; (b) Preserved open space; (c) Conservation easements; (d) Agriculture; (e) Suburban farms; (f) Private stables; (g) Single-family, attached; (h) Townhouses (no more than 25% in any development) (i) Wayside stand; and (j) Public parks and trails. (2) Conditionally Permitted. None (3) Interim Permitted. None (B) Accessory Uses. (1) Permitted. Uses deemed by the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning to be typically accessory to an established permitted use on the property as listed in 154.656(A)(1). (2) Conditionally Permitted. None (3) Interim Permitted. None (C) Prohibited Uses. All other uses not listed in 154.656(A)(1) or 154.656(A)(2) are hereby prohibited. Formatted: Font color: Red Commented [BGA13]: Staff has prepared maps and land calculations (provided in the packet) to show how each of these minimum land areas impact the potential for Open Space PUDs. Council will need to determine which is the proper threshold. Commented [SW14]: The Council determined 20 acres as minimum land area. Commented [BGA15]: Here we’ve maintained existing language. The only transition proposed is to allow the overlay district regulations to amend specific use provisions that may otherwise be in code. For example, if wayside stands are limited to one per lot, the overlay district regulations may specifically identify an area within preserved open space where up to three wayside stands may be erected at any point in time. The use has not changes, but the specific rules governing the use may be amended if deemed appropriate as part of the PUD approval. Commented [BGA16]: The Planning Commission had a split opinion on whether Townhomes should continue to be allowed in OP developments. Some felt townhomes were not appropriate in rural areas, while others felt they had been very successful in such developments to date and helped to created more open space than could otherwise be provided by all single family homes. Others pointed out that modern townhomes include detached units on zero setback “unit lots” which are surrounded by association owned and maintained property. Page 4 of 23 (D) Use Restrictions Adopted PUD overlay district regulations may include specific provisions governing uses which supersede the general regulations herein or that which may otherwise be required by underlying zoning. § 154.657 OPEN SPACE PUD DESIGN Open space PUDs shall comply with all of the following minimum design standards unless modifications are authorized for consideration by the City Council via a super-majority vote at the time of PUD Sketch Plan review. Authorization of such modifications resulting from a PUD Sketch Plan review shall not be construed as approvals for the change(s), but rather as an authorization to present such modifications as a component of the plan during the PUD Preliminary Plan review. (A) Density The maximum dwelling unit density within an open space planned unit development shall be 20 units per 40 acres of buildable land; however, the total number of dwelling units shall not exceed the density limitations contained in the Comprehensive Plan for Opens Space Preservation Development. (B) Lot Design Lot locations and configurations within open space planned unit developments shall be derived utilizing the following methodology. An applicant must be able to demonstrate how these steps resulted in the plan being proposed. (1) Soils Analysis Conducted A certified septic designer or soils scientist shall complete a review of the soils on the site, and categorize all areas as highly suitable for septic systems, moderately suitable for septic systems, or poorly suited for septic systems. (2) Septic Design Identification Based on the soils analysis, an applicant must identify whether the proposed development will be serviced by individual septic tanks and drain fields, or via a system of individual septic tanks which utilize one or more communal drain fields. (a) If individual septic tanks and drain fields can be supported by the available soils and is the chosen methodology to serve the development, all proposed lots must be able to provide primary and secondary drain field sites, and must meet a minimum lot size requirement as outlined herein. (b) If individual septic tanks which utilize communal drain fields is the chosen methodology to serve the development, then the location(s) for communal drain fields shall be identified within the area(s) deemed the most suitable on the site for supporting septic utilities according to the soils analysis. All such areas shall be clearly denoted on provided plan sets. Commented [BGA17]: This section will require ample examination as it completely reorganizes the City’s existing regulations governing lot de sign. As presented, the language is intended to ensure the City’s goals are met, and requires lots to be created utilizing the process pioneered by Randall Arendt in his book Rural by Design. While I believe that has always been the intent, the current guidance on lot design is unorganized, difficult to follow, and has no connection to how developers actually approach the creation of a development plan. What we’ve tried to accomplish in this section is to maintain the existing regulations (updated as requested and/or as necessary), but to structure them in a logical order that will result in the end product desired by the City. Commented [BGA19]: Super-majority vote requirement eliminated in favor of new review criteria in Section 154.660 Commented [BGA18]: Here is where we re-establish the current policy requiring a super-majority vote to authorize modifications to open space design standards. The current code lumps all lot design and development standards into one section (150.180). This new organization splits design requirements (i.e. how lots are made and configured) from development standards (what can be done on lots in terms of impervious surfaces, septic designs, etc), so you will see this same provision in both Section 154.657 and 154.658. Commented [BGA21]: As requested, staff double checked the language within the comprehensive plan. The current text reads: “Densities are allowed up to 0.45 dwelling units per buildable acre when planned as part of an Open Space Preservation development.” 40 acres * 0.45 d.u./acre = 18 units ... Commented [BGA20]: We have included an increased density allowance in this initial draft, but it must be noted that this can only be placed into effect in conjunction with a comprehensive plan amendment. The Comp Plan language is very specific and cannot be worked around with a zoning update. Commented [BGA22]: Requiring a developer to analyze soils followed by choosing a septic design will actually achieve the City’s goal of ensuring proper septic design drives developments. Commented [BGA23]: The Planning Commission is recommending the City consider adopting a minimum number of units before a community septic system can be used. Based on some commissioner’s personal experiences, the number 40 was suggested as a potential starting point. If Council concurs with this recommendation, the City Engineer should be asked to provide guidance on an appropriate number. Page 5 of 23 (3) Identification of Required Buffers No build zones from each property boundary shall be derived as follows: (a) A two-hundred (200) foot buffer from all adjacent property lines that abut an existing residential development or a parcel of land not eligible for future development as an open space planned unit development due to insufficient parcel area. (b) A one-hundred (100) foot buffer from all adjacent property lines that abut an existing open space planned unit development, or a parcel of landland that is eligible for future development as an open space planned unit development. (c) If the development site is adjacent to an existing or approved OP development, the required buffer shall be equivalent to the buffer that was required of the adjacent development (see Section xxx154.659). (d) By majority vote of the City Council, required buffers may be reduced or eliminated entirely if the applicant can demonstrate that existing mature vegetation, changes in topography occurring on the site, or proposed landscaping will provide an effective year- round buffer between the structures proposed within the open space planned unit development and neighboring development. Building pad locations [up to the maximum number of units permitted by 154.657(A)] which preserve natural topography and drainageways (in as much as possible), minimizes tree loss, protects historic sites or structures, and limits the need for soil removal and/or grading shall then be identified. The orientation of individual building sites shall strive to maintain maximum natural topography and ground cover. (a) Building pads shall be located outside of required buffers, and shall be cited so as to provide ample room for accessory structures on future lots. (b) Whenever possible, building pads shall be oriented in small clusters often referred to as rural hamlets. (c) If individual septic tanks and drain fields for each lot are to be utilized, locations for primary and secondary facilities for each proposed building pad shall also be identified. Generalized locations for such may be shown during the PUD Sketch Plan phase, but all such sites must be verified as being viable as a component of PUD Preliminary Plan review. (d) If individual septic tanks utilizing communal drain fields is intended, the plan must clearly identify which communal drain field will service each of the proposed building pads. (a) Streets shall then be designed and located in such a manner as to: 1. Maintain and preserve natural topography, groundcover, significant landmarks, and trees; 2. Minimize cut and fill; 3. Preserve and enhance both internal and external views and vistas; 4. Promote road safety; 5. Assure adequate access for fire and rescue vehicles; and Commented [BGA24]: As currently constructed, subsections (a) and (b) are existing requirements. Subsection (c) is new, and states that if an adjacent OP development was granted lesser setbacks (see section 154.659), then that same lesser setback would apply in a new OP development. Subsection (d) is also new, and is intended to give the City Council full authority to reduce or eliminate buffers when conditions don’t require a buffer (i.e. topography provides a buffer, woodlands provide a visual barrier, etc). Commented [BGA25]: We slightly amended this language to state the full 100 foot buffer is only needed adjacent to land that could develop as another OP in the future. Subsection (c) then handles all buffers from existing or approved OP developments. Additionally, because deviations may be approved from any PUD development standard using the criteria in Section 154.660, we have eliminated the previous buffer language that allowed for the elimination of buffers altogether. Now Council will ask whether “the overall design provides appropriate solutions to eliminate adverse impacts” when considering buffer reductions, and/or when determining what can be done within buffers (something that can be specifically written into the overlay district ordinance governing the lots being created). Commented [BGA26]: Note that a reduced buffer under subsection (d) is NOT considered a modification of design standards, but is rather a built in component of open space lot design. Accordingly, this is the one design provision that would only require a majority vote of Council to authorize. Commented [BGA27]: Both staff and the planning commission are recommending striking this provision. Commented [BGA28]: Note that even up front, we will be requiring the developer to identify general locations that can accommodate primary and secondary septic sites. Detailed information would be needed during the Preliminary Plan stage. Page 6 of 23 6. Assure and promote adequate vehicular circulation both within the development and with adjacent neighborhoods. (b) The minimum streetdesign of streets and the dedication of right-of-way for one-way streets shall be 40 feet, and the minimum right-of-way for two-way streets shallin compliance with the City’s standard plates and specifications as may be 50 feet.amended. (c) Streets shall not encroach into a required buffer area unless it can be demonstrated that such an alignment is necessary to achieve the goals outlined above, and that no equivalent option exists outside of the buffer. Driving surfaces that cross the buffer area at a 90 degree angle to provide current or future access to an adjacent property or boundary road shall be the only exception. (i) Streets shall be designed according to the following standards: Based on the street location(s), building pad locations, and septic system location(s); lines to delineate individual lots shall then be identified in accordance with the following: (a) Lot Size 1. Single-family lots being served by individual septic tanks and drain fields shall be a minimum of one (1) acre in size; 2. Single-family lots being served by individual septic tanks utilizing communal drain fields shall be a minimum of ¼1/2 acre (10,89021,780 square feet) in size; 3. Base lots for townhomes shall be large enough such that individual unit lots can meet all required structure setbacks contained herein. 1. Buildable area on each proposed lot shall be shown taking into account required. Buildable area shall exclude land within the following areas: a. Required buffers from adjacent parcelslands [see section 154.657(3)] b. Steep slopes; c. Drainage swales; d. Easements; and 1.e. Land within the following setback standardssetbacks: HOUSING TYPE Additional Requirements Single Family Homes Townhomes Front Yard 30 20 xxx Side Yard 15 feet or 10% of lot width xxx Corner Lot Front Yard 30 xxx Corner Lot Side Yard 30 xxx Rear Yard 20 xxx Well from Septic Tank 50 xxx 2. Proposed buildable area on each lot shall be sufficient to accommodate primary and Commented [BGA29]: Rather than list allowable ROW widths and paved street widths, staff is recommending simply referring to the City’s standard plates and specifications. Again, if deviations are requested, the PUD review criteria will guide Council as to whether such deviations are warranted. We elected to stay silent on how signage can or cannot be used (i.e. no parking signs) to allow Council to make individual determinations depending upon the circumstances. Commented [BGA31]: We have amended this language to reinstitute the existing minimum lot sizes of one acre and one-half acre depending upon the septic system approach being used. Commented [BGA30]: Staff is asking the City to consider allowing lots as small as ¼ acre within open space developments for two main reasons: 1) provides greater flexibility to developers who will only respond to market demands; and 2) density is capped, so smaller lots will not result in more homes but rather m ore open space (which is the point). The Planning Commission felt that a ½ acre minimum was preferable. Commented [BGA32]: This language was clarified to ensure developers understood what constituted buildable land on each lot. Commented [BGA33]: “Easements” assumes that all stormwater ponds, rain gardens, wetlands, etc. will be protected by easements. If not, those features will also need to be listed here. Page 7 of 23 accessory structures that are normal and customary to the type of development being proposed. (15)(7) Open Space and Parkland Adjustments (a) Open Space 1. The total preserved open space area within an open space planned unit development shall be no less than 50% of the total gross land area, as defined by § 11.01. If this threshold is not achieved after following the first six steps of lot design, the proposed lot areas will need to be adjusted or lots eliminated until this requirement is met. 2. Not less than 60% of the preserved open space shall be in contiguous parcels which are ten (10) or more acres in size. 3. Preserved open space parcels shall be contiguous with preserved open space or public park land on adjacent parcels. (b) Parkland 1. Parks and recreational facilities shall be provided in addition to preserved open space as specified in the Lake Elmo Parks Plan. 2. Determination of whether a land or cash dedication will be required to fulfil parkland requirements will be at the discretion of the City Council, with direction to be provided as a component of PUD Sketch Plan review. If a required parkland dedication causes overall open space to drop below the minimum threshold, the proposed lot areas will need to be adjusted or lots eliminated until the open space requirement is once again met. 3. Any dedication shall be consistent with the dedication and fee-in-lieu standards specified in Chapter 153. § 154.658 OPEN SPACE PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Open space PUDs shall comply with all of the following development standards unless modifications are authorized for consideration by the City Council via a super-majority vote at the time of PUD Sketch Plan review. Authorization of such modifications resulting from a PUD Sketch Plan review shall not be construed as approvals for the change(s), but rather as an authorization to present such modifications as a component of the plan during the PUD Preliminary Plan review. (1) Preserved Open Space Standards (a) All preserved open space within an open space planned unit development shall be subject to a conservation easement and used for the purposes as defined by §§ 150.175 et seq. (b) Preserved open space land shall be controlled in one or more of following manners as Commented [BGA34]: The overall seven (7) step design process we have laid out now both emphasizes what is important to the City while recognizing and embracing how a developer will approach the site anyway. At this final step, the developer may need to shrink lot sizes or eliminate lots to meet open space and parkland requirements. Commented [BGA35]: The open space provisions are existing requirements. The Planning Commission would like additional requirements or changes that would eliminate the use of thin strips of land to connect open spaces. A minimum dimension could be considered. Commented [BGA36]: Until we know what minimum land area will be authorized to apply for an open space PUD, we did not want to spend time trying to ascertain whether this standard needs to be amended. This will be addressed in the final version of the ordinance that goes before the planning commission. Commented [BGA37]: While Section 154.657 lays out the regulations that dictate how a development is laid out, Section 154.658 tells the applicant how the development must be constructed and improved. Here again we maintain the city’s existing development standards for open space developments (i.e. regulating open space, septic systems, building standards, landscaping standards, impervious surface standards, and trail standards). Commented [BGA39]: Super-majority vote requirement eliminated in favor of new review criteria in Section 154.660 Commented [BGA38]: Because this is a new section, we again must state that a super-majority vote is needed to authorize modifications during Sketch Plan review. Page 8 of 23 determined at the sole discretion of the City Council: 1. Owned by an individual or legal entity who will use the land for preserved open space purposes as provided by permanent conservation restrictions (in accordance with M.S. Ch. 84C.01-.05, as it may be amended from time to time), to an acceptable land trust as approved by the city; and/or 2. Conveyed by conservation easement to the city. (c) Preserved open space land shall be maintained for the purposes for which it was set aside. If preserved open space was set aside for agricultural purposes or for natural habitat, a plan shall be submitted which will indicate how the land will be maintained or returned to a natural state and who will be responsible for plan implementation. Developers shall provide copies of common interest community (CIC) declarations to prospective purchasers, and conservation easements to the city, describing land management practices to be followed by the party or parties responsible for maintaining the preserved open space. (d) Where applicable, a Common Interest Community association shall be established to permanently maintain all residual open space and recreational facilities. The Common Interest Community association agreements, guaranteeing continuing maintenance, and giving lien right to the city if there is lack of the maintenance shall be submitted to the city as part of the documentation requirements of §§ 150.175 et seq. for a final plan. (2) Septic System Design Standards (a) In General (a) All septic systems shall conform to the performance standards of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s standards for sewage treatment systems WPC-7080 and its appendices, or the M.P.C.A. standards in effect at the time of installation and septic system regulations of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code. (b) Communal drain fieldsIndividual Septic Drain fields Sites for individual septic drain fields, both primary and secondary, must be located entirely within each lot and cannot be located within any other easement. (c) Communal Drain Fields. (b)a. Communal drain fields may be partially or completely located in an area designated as preserved open space provided: 1.i. The ground cover is restored to its natural condition after installation; and 2.ii. Recreational uses are prohibited above or within 50 feet of communal drain fields, or as approved by the City Engineer. 0. No wetland treatment system shall be allowed within the village green. (3) Building Standards Commented [BGA40]: The Planning Commission would like the City Attorney to provide guidance on proper lien language to protect against community septic systems from failing, and an HOA that is unwilling or unable to act. Formatted: Indent: Left: 1", No bullets or numbering Commented [BGA41]: City staff will need to ensure these existing references are still accurate based on how the City current regulates septic systems. Does Washington County need to be referenced? Commented [BGA42]: This new requirements would mandate that all individual septic systems be located on private property. Formatted: Indent: Left: 1" Commented [BGA43]: Existing language regarding wetland treatment systems has been eliminated as directed. The new ordinance would be silent on such systems, and Engineering would be looked at for guidance if such a system is proposed in the future. Commented [BGA44]: The Planning Commission and staff are both recommending that this phrase be stricken from the ordinance. “Village Green” is not defined within the ordinance, and recent developments within the Old Village have not (it appears) provided the envisioned belt around the urbanizing town core. Whether wetland treatment systems should be allowed should be a question for the City Engineer. Page 9 of 23 (a) Principal structures within open space planned unit developments shall not exceed 2 and ½ stories or 35 feet in height. (b) Accessory structures within open space planned unit developments shall not exceed 22 feet in height. (c) It is desired that the structures within neighborhoods convey a particular architectural style with similar building components, materials, roof pitches. The PUD Overlay ordinance crafted for each individual development should establish minimum architectural standards for the neighborhood. (4) Landscaping Standards (a) A landscape plan for the entire site is required and shall consist of at least 10 trees per building site; and trees shall not be not less than 1.5 inch in caliper measured at 54 inches above grade level. (b) Boulevard landscaping is required along all streets to consist of at least 1 tree per every 30 feet or placed in clusters at the same ratio. OR The maximum impervious surface allowable within an open space planned unit development shall be 20% of the land area not dedicated as preserved open space subject to the following: (a) Impervious surfaces created by roads, trails, and other planned impervious improvements shall count against the maximum allowed impervious coverage. (b) Remaining allowed impervious surface acreage may be distributed between the planned building sites, and maximums for each lot shall be clearly documented within the overlay district ordinance governing the development. (c) On individual lots, areas covered by pervious pavers or comparable systems may receive a 25% credit against the lot’s hardcover if the system is installed consistent with the City of Lake Elmo Engineering Standards Manual, and adequate storm water mitigation measures (as may be necessary) are installed to mitigate potential runoff created by the additional coverage above the allowed impervious surface threshold. All such credits shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer. (9)(6) Trail Standards A trail system or sidewalks shall be established within open space planned unit developments in accordance with the following: (a) The linear footage of trails provided shall be at least equal in length to the sum of the centerline length of all public roads within the development. (b) All trails shall be constructed of asphalt or concrete in compliance with the standard city design plate for OP trails. Commented [BGA45]: The Planning Commission questioned whether we should specifically exclude historic structures from this requirement. Staff would say “no.” Historic structures taller than 22 feet would be legal nonconforming structures subject to protections of State Statute. We strongly recommend not creating special provisions based on the age of a building. Commented [BGA46]: As directed, the optional landscaping standards have been eliminated in favor of the existing standards. Commented [BGA47]: The Planning Commission thought the existing language could be considered a bit confusing. This second set of subsections (a & b) is just optional language for consideration. Commented [BGA50]: The “pathway” standards that are currently lumped into a single paragraph are now broken apart in this new ordinance. Commented [BGA51]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 3 Commented [BGA52]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 4 Page 10 of 23 (c) Proposed trails shall provide connections between and access to the buildable land areas and preserved open space land being created by the development. (d) Proposed trails shall connect to existing, planned, or anticipated trails or roads on adjacent parcels. (e) If applicable, trails shall be linked (or be designed to provide a future link) to the “Old Village” to emphasize the connection between existing and new development. Buffer setbacks shall be applied from the edge of the existing open space preservation developments as follows. Recommended Buffer Setbacks in OP Developments (in feet) North Edge South Edge West Edge East Edge Exception Parcel(s) St. Croix’s Sanctuary 200 50 50 100 Discover Crossing 200 100 50 100 Whistling Valley I 25 200 N/A N/A Whistling Valley 1I 25 100 85 N/A Whistling Valley III 50 100 100 N/A Farms of Lake Elmo 100 50 100 25 Prairie Hamlet 200 50 50 100 Fields of St. Croix I 50 N/A 200 100 Fields of St. Croix 1I N/A 200 200 N/A N/A The Homestead 50 50 200 50 Tapestry at Charlotte’s Grove 50 50 200 50 100 Tamarack Farm Estates 100 100 100 100 Sunfish Ponds 100 100 100 200 Hamlet on Sunfish Lake 50 100 50 50 Cardinal Ridge 100 200 50 50 Wildflower Shoves 100 200 100 200 Heritage Farms 50 N/A N/A 50 N/A Commented [BGA53]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 1 Commented [BGA54]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 1 Commented [BGA55]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 2 Commented [BGA57]: The current ordinance labels these setbacks as “Recommended.” We are recommending striking that language. Page 11 of 23 Tana Ridge (Res. 2009-033) N/A N/A 50 50 Parkview Estates (Res. 2009-033) 50; except Lot 9, Block 5 use 20 ft N/A N/A 50 § 154.660 OPEN SPACE PUD REVIEW CRITERIA The following findings shall be made by the City Council prior to approval of a new or amended open space planned unit development: (1) The proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. (2) The Preliminary Plan is consistent with the purpose of §§ 150.175 et seq. (3) The Preliminary Plan complies with the development standards of §§ 150.175 et seq (2) All prerequisites for an open space PUD as outlined in § 154.655 are met. (3) All open space PUD design standards (as outlined in § 154.657) and all open space development standards (as outlined in § 154.658) are met; or if deviations are proposed, that all such deviations are supported because: a. The deviation(s) allow for quality building and site design that will enhance aesthetics of the site; b. The deviation(s) help to create a unified environment within the project boundaries by ensuring one or more of the following: architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, enhanced landscaping and site features, and/or efficient use of utilities; c. The overall design provides appropriate solutions to eliminate adverse impacts that proposed deviations may impose on surrounding lands. (4) If the proposed PUD involves construction over two or more phases, the applicant has demonstrated that each phase is capable of being a stand-alone development independent of other phases. § 154.661 OPEN SPACE PUD REVIEW PROCEDURE All requests to establish an open space Planned Unit Development shall be initiated by following the steps below. (2)(1) Open Space PUD Sketch Plan (a) Purpose Commented [BGA59]: Lists the questions the City will ask when reviewing these types of developments. These criteria have been updated since the last review by Council in response to the super-majority vote for deviations being removed. Rather than keeping such decision-making open- ended, we are proposing a set of criteria (in subdivision 3) by which Council may judge proposed deviations: 1) Do the deviations allow for a quality design that enhances the aesthetics of the site? 2)Do the deviations help to tie the development together to achieve one or more of the listed benefits? 3)Does the site design include appropriate solutions to mitigate adverse impacts of the proposed deviation? By including a framework for decision making on deviations, we eliminate some of the subjectivity that can arise as PUDs are reviewed. Additional criteria can be added as Council may see fit. We have also added subdivision 4 which introduces a new review criteria requiring that phased developments result in pieces that can stand-alone should the development go belly-up prior to completion. Commented [BGA58]: Lists the questions the City will ask when reviewing these types of developments. Additional criteria may be needed (this is essentially all we see in the current code), but we’ve left that determination for another day. Commented [BGA60]: This lengthy section outlines the process to be used to review open space PUDs from beginning to end. In general, this current draft follows the standard City platting process with specific PUD requirements thrown in. Boiled down to its core, the review will require a sketch plan proposal, a preliminary plan, and then a final plan. Page 12 of 23 The open space PUD Sketch Plan is the first step in the development process which gives the applicant an opportunity to present their ideas to the City Council and public so as to gain general feedback on areas that will require additional analysis, study, design, changes, etc. 0. At Council’s discretion via super-majority vote, any of the minimum standards outlined in either § 154.657 or § 154.658 may be modified to authorize submission of an open space PUD Preliminary Plan that is tailored to the development site. Authorization of such modifications resulting from a PUD Sketch Plan review shall not be construed as approvals for the change(s), but rather as an authorization to present such modifications as a component of the plan during the PUD Preliminary Plan review. Except as may be waived by the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning, the following information shall constitute a complete application for an open space PUD Sketch Plan. 1. A listing of contact information including name(s), address(es) and phone number(s) of: the owner of record, authorized agents or representatives, engineer, surveyor, and any other relevant associates; 2. A listing of the following site data: Address, current zoning, parcel size in acres and square feet and current legal description(s); 3. A narrative explaining the applicant’s proposed objectives for the open space PUD, a listing of the proposed modifications from standard in § 154.657 as may be applicable, and an explanation of how the proposal addresses the PUD review criteria in § 154.660. 4. A listing of general information including the following: a. Number of proposed residential units. b. Calculation of the proposed density of the project showing compliance with § 154.657(A). c. A listing of all proposed land uses (i.e. preserved open space, buildable sites, parkland, etc). d. Square footages of land dedicated to each proposed land use. 5. An existing conditions exhibit, including topography, that identifies the location of the following environmental features along with calculations (in acres) for each: a. Gross site acreage; b. Existing wetlands; c. Existing woodlands; Commented [BGA61]: We are currently struggling with this language in this draft, and where it is most appropriately located. In general, we strongly advise against repeating standards; stating things once is always the best approach. Earlier we state this provision in both sections 154.657 and 154.658 as we want to put the reader on notice that flexibility is built into the process, and that lot design and development standards are not entirely rigid. At the same time, it seems appropriate to have that provision here. As the draft continues to be refined, we will determine the best location for this language, but wanted to show this as an option. Commented [BGA62]: We are quite detailed on the information that must be provided with applications to protect the City’s ability to deem applications incomplete when necessary. Allowing the Community Development Department to waive individual requirements allows staff to use discretion on what to require given the particulars of a specific application. Page 13 of 23 d. Areas with slopes greater than 12%, but less than 25%; e. Areas with slopes of 25% or greater; f. Woodlands; g. Other pertinent land cover(s). 6. An open space PUD Sketch Plan illustrating the nature of the proposed development. At a minimum, the plan should show: a. Existing zoning district(s) on the subject land and all adjacent parcels; b. Layout of proposed lots and proposed uses denoting Outlots planned for public dedication and/or preserved open space; c. Area calculations for each parcel; d. General location of wetlands and/or watercourses over the property and within 200 feet of the perimeter of the subdivision parcel; e. Location of existing and proposed streets within and immediately adjacent to the subdivision parcel; f. Proposed sidewalks and trails; g. Proposed parking areas; h. General location of wooded areas or significant features (environmental, historical, cultural) of the parcel; i. Location of utility systems that will serve the property; j. Calculations for the following: i. Gross land area (in acres); ii. Number of proposed residential units. iii. Proposed density of the project showing compliance with § 154.657(A). iv. Acreage & square footage of land dedicated to each proposed land use (i.e. preserved open space, buildable sites, parkland, etc). v. Acreage & square footage of land proposed for public road right-of-way; vi. Acreage & square footage of land dedicated to drainage ways and ponding areas; vii. Acreage & square footage of land for Trails and/or sidewalks (if outside of proposed road right-of-way); k. Other: An applicant may submit any additional information that may explain the proposed PUD or support any requests for modifications (i.e. a landscaping plan to support the lessening or elimination of an otherwise required buffer). 7. The outline of a conceptual development schedule indicating the approximate date when construction of the project, or stages of the same, can be expected to begin and be completed (including the proposed phasing of construction of public improvements and recreational & common space areas). Page 14 of 23 8. A statement of intent to establish a Common Interest Community association with bylaws and deed restrictions to include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Ownership, management, and maintenance of defined preserved open space; b. Maintenance of public and private utilities; and c. General architectural guidelines for principal and accessory structures. 9. If applicable, a historic preservation plan for any historic structures on the site shall be submitted. (d)(c) Open Space PUD Sketch Plan Proposal Review 1. Planning Commission a. Upon receiving an open space PUD Sketch Plan proposal, the Community Development DepartmentCity shall schedule a date upon which the Planning Commission will review the plans and hold a public hearing on the proposal. Notice for the public hearing shall be completed in conformance with (reference applicable code section assuming we have one).. b. Following the hearingUpon completing their review, the Planning Commission shall adopt findings and recommendations on the proposed open space PUD as soon as practical. The Community Development Department c. The Director of Planning may forward an application to the City Council without a recommendation from the Planning Commission only if it is deemed necessary to ensure compliance with state mandated deadlines for application review. 2. City Council a. The City Council may listen to comments on the proposed development if they deem such necessary prior to taking action on the proposed open space PUD Sketch plan. b. After consideration of the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning’s recommendation, the Planning Commission recommendation, and the comments received at the public hearing, the City Council may comment on the merit of the request, needed changes, and suggested conditions that the proposer should adhere to with any future application. c. For each of the identified modifications to the minimum standards outlined in § 154.657, the City Council shall take a vote to instruct the applicant as to whether the modification can be pursued as a component of the PUD Preliminary Plan review. The ability to pursue approval of modified standards may only be authorized via a super-majority vote of the City Council. (e)(d) Effect of a PUD Sketch Plan Review Commented [BGA63]: In accordance with the current process, we have included a public hearing at the sketch plan level. Because we are utilizing Sketch Plan to determine what modifications may be requested at the Preliminary stage, a public hearing still seems appropriate. Commented [BGA64]: The need for a sketch plan public hearing before the Planning Commission was eliminated as requested. Commented [BGA65]: Under this process, Council would take individual votes on each modification proposed by the applicant. Approval at this stage ONLY authorizes the applicant to make the request at the Preliminary stage; it does NOT grant any rights to the modification. Again, modifications can only be pursued IF Council allows such via a super majority vote. Commented [BGA66]: This subsection clarifies EXACTLY what a developer gets as a result of the sketch plan process. Page 15 of 23 The City Council and Planning Commission’s comments during the PUD Sketch Plan review are explicitly not an approval or denial of the project, and are intended only to provide information for the applicant to consider prior to application for an open space PUD Preliminary Plan. (f)(e) Limitation of Approval The City Council’s review of an open space PUD Sketch Plan shall remain valid for a period of six (6) months. The City Council, in its sole discretion, may extend the validity of their findings for an additional year. (3)(2) PUD Preliminary Plan (a) Prerequisite No application for an open space PUD Preliminary Plan will be accepted unless a distinctly similar proposal has completed the open space PUD Sketch Plan review process which is valid upon the date of application. (b) PUD Preliminary Plan Submittal Requirements Except as may be waived by the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning, the following information shall constitute a complete application for an open space PUD Preliminary Plan. 1. All required information for a preliminary plat per Chapter 1102, Section 1102.01(C) and Section 1102.02. 2. A written summary of the required Developer Open House meeting as required by Chapter 1102, Section 1102.01(B)(5). 3. A separate open space PUD Preliminary Plan which includes the following information: a. Administrative information (including identification of the drawing as an “Open Space PUD Preliminary Plan,” the proposed name of the project, contact information for the developer and individual preparing the plan, signature of the surveyor and civil engineer certifying the document, date of plan preparation or revision, and a graphic scale and north arrow); b. Area calculations for gross land area, wetland areas, right-of-way dedications, and proposed public and private parks or open space; c. Existing zoning district(s) on the subject land and all adjacent parcels; d. Layout of proposed lots with future lot and block numbers. The perimeter boundary line of the subdivision should be distinguishable from the other property lines. Denote Outlots planned for public dedication and/or open space (schools, parks, etc.); e. The location of proposed septic disposal area(s); Commented [BGA67]: Sketch Plan reviews may remain valid for up to 1.5 years. Commented [BGA68]: The City will not accept a preliminary plan application unless a valid sketch plan is in place. Page 16 of 23 f. Area calculations for each parcel; g. Proposed setbacks on each lot (forming the building pad) and calculated buildable area; h. Proposed gross hardcover allowance per lot (if applicable); i. Existing contours at intervals of two feet. Contours must extend a minimum of 200 feet beyond the boundary of the parcel(s) in question; j. Delineation of wetlands and/or watercourses over the property; k. Delineation of the ordinary high water levels of all water bodies; l. Location, width, and names of existing and proposed streets within and immediately adjacent to the subdivision parcel; m. Easements and rights-of-way within or adjacent to the subdivision parcel(s); n. The location and orientation of proposed buildings; o. Proposed sidewalks and trails; o. p. Vehicular circulation system showing location and dimension for all driveways, parking spaces, parking lot aisles, service roads, loading areas, fire lanes, emergency access, if necessary, public and private streets, alleys, sidewalks, bike paths, direction of traffic flow and traffic control devices; q. Lighting location, style and mounting and light distribution plan. r. Proposed parks, common areas, and preservation easements (indicate public vs. private if applicable); s. Location, access and screening detail of large trash handling and recycling collection areas 4. Colored renderings which detail the building materials being used and clearly communicate the look and design of the proposed building(s); 5. Proposed architectural and performance standards for the development; 6. A grading drainage and erosion control plan prepared by a registered professional engineer providing all information as required by Public Works, the City Engineer, and/or the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning; 7. A utility plan providing all information as required by Public Works, the City Engineer, and/or the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning; 8. Results of deep soil test pits and percolation tests, at the rate of no fewer than 2 successful test results for each proposed septic disposal area; 9. A landscape plan, including preliminary sketches of how the landscaping will look, prepared by a qualified professional providing all information outlined in Section <insert applicable section here> ; 10. A tree preservation plan as required by Section <insert applicable section here>; Page 17 of 23 11. The location and detail of signage providing all pertinent information necessary to determine compliance with Section <insert applicable section here>; 12. A traffic study containing, at a minimum, the total and peak hour trip generation from the site at full development, and the effect of such traffic on the level of service of nearby and adjacent streets, intersections, and total parking requirements; 13. A plan sheet or narrative clearly delineating all features being modified from standard open space PUD regulations; 14. Common Interest Community Association documents including bylaws, deed restrictions, covenants, and proposed conservation easements. 15. Any other information as directed by the Community Development Department.Director of Planning. 15. (c) PUD Preliminary Plan Review 1. As part of the review process for an open space PUD Preliminary Plan, the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning shall generate an analysis of the proposal against the expectations for PUDs, and make a recommendation regarding the proposed overlay district for Planning Commission and City Council consideration. 2. The Community Development DepartmentThe Director of Planning shall prepare a draft ordinance to establish the potential overlay district to be established as a component of the PUD Final Plan. 3. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing and consider the application’s consistency with the goals for PUDs, the PUD review criteria, and applicable comprehensive plan goals. The Planning Commission shall make recommendations to the City Council on the merit, needed changes, and suggested conditions to impose on the PUD. 4. In approving or denying the PUD Preliminary Plan, the City Council shall make findings on the PUD review criteria outlined in Section 1023.08. 5. As a condition of PUD Preliminary Plan approval; finalization, adoption, and publication of an overlay district ordinance shall need to occur prior to the filing of any future final plat. (d) Effect of a PUD Preliminary Plan Review Preliminary Plan approval governs the preparation of the PUD Final Plan which must be submitted for final approval in accordance with the requirements of this Article. Commented [BGA69]: Rather than allowing the applicant to draft an overlay district, we are proposing that staff begin the process at preliminary plan. The cost for this work will need to be incorporated into the fee for a Preliminary Plan application. Note that staff will ONLY be creating a draft now for feedback and direction. The actual code language will be reviewed during the Final Plan phase. Commented [BGA70]: This subsection clarifies EXACTLY what a developer gets as a result of the Preliminary Plan process. Page 18 of 23 (e) Limitation of Approval The City Council’s review of an open space PUD Preliminary Plan shall remain valid for a period of one (1) year. The City Council, in its sole discretion, may extend the validity of their findings for an additional year. (4)(3) PUD Final Plan (a) Application Deadline Application for an open space PUD Final Plan shall be submitted for approval within ninety (90) days of City Council approval of the open space PUD Preliminary Plan unless a written request for a time extension is submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council. (b) PUD Final Plan Submittal Requirements Except as may be waived by the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning, the following information shall constitute a complete application for an open space PUD Final Plan. 1. All required information for a final plat per <insert applicable section here>; 2. All required PUD Preliminary Plan documents, other than the preliminary plat, shall be updated to incorporate and address all conditions of PUD Preliminary Plan approval. 3. Any deed restrictions, covenants, agreements, and articles of incorporation and bylaws of any proposed homeowners’ association or other documents or contracts which control the use or maintenance of property covered by the PUD. 4. A final staging plan, if staging is proposed, indicating the geographical sequence and timing of development, including the estimated start and completion date for each stage. 5. Up-to-date title evidence for the subject property in a form acceptable to the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning. 6. Warranty deeds for Property being dedicated to the City for all parks, Outlots, etc., free from all liens and encumbrances. 7. All easement dedication documents for easements not shown on the final plat including those for trails, ingress/egress, buffer establishment, etc., together with all necessary consents to the easement by existing encumbrancers of the property. 8. Any other information deemed necessary by the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning to fully present the intention and character of the open space PUD. 9. If certain land areas or structures within the open space PUD are designated for recreational use, public plazas, open areas or service facilities, the owner of such land Commented [BGA71]: Preliminary Plan approvals may remain valid for up to 2.0 years. Commented [BGA72]: To ensure the process continues to move forward, we are recommending a 90 day time-frame in which the final plan application must be submitted. Commented [BGA73]: Here we denote that easements may be created to memorialize buffer areas on individual lots. Page 19 of 23 and buildings shall provide a plan to the city that ensures the continued operation and maintenance of such areas or facilities in a manner suitable to the city. (c) PUD Final Plan Review 1. The Community Development DepartmentThe Director of Planning shall generate an analysis of the final documents against the conditions of the open space PUD Preliminary Plan approval, and make a recommendation as to whether all conditions have been met or if additional changes are needed. 2. Staff should once again identify any information submittals that were waived so Council may determine if such is needed prior to making a final decision. 3. The Community Development DepartmentThe Director of Planning shall finalize the ordinance to establish the proposed overlay district for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. 4. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the proposed Overlay District ordinance and open space Final PUD Plans, and shall submit a recommendation to the City Council for consideration. Because an open space PUD Preliminary Plan was previously approved, the Planning Commission’s recommendation shall only focus on whether the Ordinance and open space PUD Final Plan are in substantial compliance with the open space PUD Preliminary Plan and the required conditions of approval. 5. The City Council shall then consider the recommendations of the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning, the public, and the Planning Commission; and make a decision of approval or denial, in whole or in part, on the open space PUD Final Plan. A denial shall only be based on findings that an open space PUD Final Plan is not in substantial compliance with the approved open space PUD Preliminary Plan and/or the required conditions of approval. 6. As a condition of PUD Final Plan approval, publication of the overlay district ordinance shall be required prior to filing of the approved final plat. 7. Planned Unit Development Agreement. a. At its sole discretion, the City may as a condition of approval, require the owner and developer of the proposed open space PUD to execute a development agreement which may include but not be limited to all requirements of the open space PUD Final Plan. b. The development agreement may require the developers to provide an irrevocable letter of credit in favor of the City. The letter of credit shall be provided by a financial institution licensed in the state and acceptable to the City. Commented [BGA74]: Unlike most platting processes, we must hold a public hearing at this point in the process as the City must adopt the final ordinance language that will govern the PUD. Page 20 of 23 The City may require that certain provisions and conditions of the development agreement be stated in the letter of credit. The letter of credit shall be in an amount sufficient to ensure the provision or development of improvement called for by the development agreement. 8. As directed by the City, documents related to the PUD shall be recorded against the property. (d) Time Limit 1. A Planned Unit Development shall be validated by the applicant through the commencement of any necessary construction or establishment of the authorized use(s), subject to the permit requirements of Title 9 of this Code, in support of the Planned Unit Development within one (1) year of the date of open space PUD Final Plan approval. Failure to meet this deadline shall render the open space PUD Final Plan approval void. Notwithstanding this time limitation, the City Council may approve extensions of the time allowed for validation of the Planned Unit Development approval if requested in writing by the applicant; extension requests shall be submitted to the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning and shall identify the reason(s) why the extension is necessary along with an anticipated timeline for validation of the Planned Unit Development. 2. An application to reinstate an open space PUD that was voided for not meeting the required time limit shall be administered in the same manner as a new open space PUD beginning at open space PUD Preliminary Plan. § 154.662 OPEN SPACE PUD AMENDMENTS Approved open space PUDs may be amended from time to time as a result of unforeseen circumstances, overlooked opportunities, or requests from a developer or neighborhood. At such a time, the applicant shall make an application to the city for an open space PUD amendment. (A) Amendments to Existing Open Space PUD Overlay District(s) Amendments to an approved open space PUD Overlay district shall be processed as one of the following: (1) Administrative Amendment The Community Development DepartmentThe Director of Planning may approve minor changes in the location, placement, and height of buildings if such changes are required by engineering or other circumstances, provided the changes conform to the approved overlay district intent and are consistent with all requirements of the open space PUD ordinance. Under no circumstances shall an administrative amendment allow additional stories to buildings, additional lots, or changes to designated uses established as part of the PUD. An Administrative Amendment shall be memorialized via letter signed by the Community Development Director and recorded against the PUD property. Commented [BGA75]: This section will deal with how the City will process amendments to both open space PUDs and existing OP developments. Page 21 of 23 (2) Ordinance Amendment A PUD change requiring a text update to the adopted open space PUD overlay district language shall be administered in accordance with adopted regulations for zoning code changes in Section xxx. Ordinance amendments shall be limited to changes that are deemed by the Community Development DepartmentDirector of Planning to be consistent with the intent of the original open space PUD approval, but are technically necessary due to construction of the adopted overlay district language. (3) PUD Amendment Any change not qualifying for an administrative amendment or an Ordinance amendment shall require an open space PUD amendment. An application to amend an open space PUD shall be administered in the same manner as that required for a new PUD beginning at open space PUD Preliminary Plan. (B) Pre-existing OP Developments (work in progress) Pre-existing OP developments authorized prior to [date this ordinance is effective] shall continue to be governed per the original conditions of approval until the OP development is cancelled by the City, or the OP development is converted to an open space PUD overlay district. An application to amend an existing OP development shall be administered in the same manner as that required for a new open space PUD beginning at open space PUD Preliminary Plan. § 154.663 PUD CANCELLATION An open space PUD shall only be cancelled and revoked upon the City Council adopting an ordinance rescinding the overlay district establishing the PUD. Cancellation of a PUD shall include findings that demonstrate that the PUD is no longer necessary due to changes in local regulations over time; is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan or other application land use regulations; threatens public safety, health, or welfare; or other applicable findings in accordance with law. § 154.664 ADMINISTRATION In general, the following rules shall apply to all open space PUDs: (A) Rules and regulations No requirement outlined in the open space PUD review process shall restrict the City Council from taking action on an application if necessary to meet state mandated time deadlines; Commented [BGA76]: This section will be written if these amendments continue to move forward. Commented [BGA77]: This section outlines the process for cancelling a previous PUD approval. Commented [BGA78]: This section includes some final rules and regulations deemed important by staff. Page 22 of 23 (B) Preconstruction No building permit shall be granted for any building on land for which an open space PUD plan is in the process of review, unless the proposed building is allowed under the existing zoning and will not impact, influence, or interfere with the proposed open space PUD plan. (C) Effect on Conveyed Property In the event that any real property in an approved open space PUD is conveyed in total, or in part, the new owners thereof shall be bound by the provisions of the approved overlay district. SECTION 6 (Will update the list of overlay districts in Chapter 154 to include the Open Space Planned Unit Development Overlay District) PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 6/27-16 AGENDA ITEM: 5B – BUSINESS ITEM CASE # N/A ITEM: Temporary Family Health Care Dwellings SUBMITTED BY: Emily Becker, Planner REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: On May 12, 2016, Governor Dayton signed in to law the creation and regulations of temporary family health care dwellings, codified as Minn. Stat. 462.3593, which permit and regulate temporary family health care dwellings. The law goes into effect on Septem ber 1, 2016 unless cities adopt an ordinance opting out. The Planning Commission should consider either recommending adoption of an ordinance to opt out or adopt an ordinance that sets forth certain standards and application requirements for temporary family health care dwellings. REQUEST DETAILS: Community desire for transitional housing for those with mental and physical disabilities, and the increased need for short-term care for aging family members served as the catalyst behind this State Legislature initiative. The resulting law, Chapter 111, allows for a family to more easily care for these individuals by using a temporary dwelling on the property. PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES/REVIEW AND ANALYSIS: Not Addressed in Zoning Code. The Zoning Code does not specifically address temporary health care dwellings. Temporary dwellings are only mentioned in Design and Performance Standards – Restrictions on Nuisance and Hazardous Activities Article, Sections 154.915 Temporary farm dwelling; 154.916 Temporary construction office; and 154.917 Recreation vehicles. Secondary dwellings are addressed in the Zoning Code but should be treated differently due to their permanency. Standards. If the City chooses to allow temporary health care dwellings, there should be certain standards and restrictions specific to temporary health care dwellings. Unless the municipality has designated temporary family health care dwellings as permitted uses, they are subject to the provisions of the State Statute. The City should consider if further standards should be met in order to meet its needs and goals. Planning Commission Meeting June 27/2016 Discussion Item #__ Page 2 Accessory Structure. If the City allows temporary health care dwellings, it should decide if they should adhere to the same restrictions as accessory structures. It should be noted that a temporary health care dwelling that meets the requirements outlined by the State cannot be prohibited by a local ordinance that regulates accessory uses or recreational vehicles parking. Permit. The State requires that the temporary dwelling needs a permit and sets forth certain application requirements. These should be included in the Code and the City should consider if further requirements are needed. No public hearing required. No public hearing is required due to the time-sensitive nature of issuing a temporary family health care dwelling. RECCOMENDATION: Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission review Chapter 111 and recommend either: A. Opting out of the regulations; or B. Amend the Code to permit temporary family health care dwellings with certain standards. ATTACHMENTS:  Chapter 111 2016 Minnesota Session Laws Key: (1) language to be deleted (2) new language CHAPTER 111--S.F.No. 2555 An act relating to local government; regulating zoning of temporary family health care dwellings; establishing temporary dwelling permits; amending Minnesota Statutes 2014, section 144D.01, subdivision 4; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapters 394; 462. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2014, section 144D.01, subdivision 4, is amended to read: Subd. 4.Housing with services establishment or establishment. (a) "Housing with services establishment" or "establishment" means: (1) an establishment providing sleeping accommodations to one or more adult residents, at least 80 percent of which are 55 years of age or older, and offering or providing, for a fee, one or more regularly scheduled health-related services or two or more regularly scheduled supportive services, whether offered or provided directly by the establishment or by another entity arranged for by the establishment; or (2) an establishment that registers under section 144D.025. (b) Housing with services establishment does not include: (1) a nursing home licensed under chapter 144A; (2) a hospital, certified boarding care home, or supervised living facility licensed under sections 144.50 to 144.56; (3) a board and lodging establishment licensed under chapter 157 and Minnesota Rules, parts 9520.0500 to 9520.0670, 9525.0215 to 9525.0355, 9525.0500 to 9525.0660, or 9530.4100 to 9530.4450, or under chapter 245D; (4) a board and lodging establishment which serves as a shelter for battered women or other similar purpose; (5) a family adult foster care home licensed by the Department of Human Services; (6) private homes in which the residents are related by kinship, law, or affinity with the providers of services; (7) residential settings for persons with developmental disabilities in which the services are licensed under Minnesota Rules, parts 9525.2100 to 9525.2140, or applicable successor rules or laws; (8) a home-sharing arrangement such as when an elderly or disabled person or single-parent family makes lodging in a private residence available to another person in exchange for services or rent, or both; (9) a duly organized condominium, cooperative, common interest community, or owners' association of the foregoing where at least 80 percent of the units that comprise the condominium, cooperative, or common interest community are occupied by individuals who are the owners, members, or shareholders of the units; or Page 1 of 6Chapter 111 - Minnesota Session Laws 6/8/2016https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=111&year=2016&type=0 (10) services for persons with developmental disabilities that are provided under a license according to Minnesota Rules, parts 9525.2000 to 9525.2140 in effect until January 1, 1998, or under chapter 245D; or (11) a temporary family health care dwelling as defined in sections 394.307 and 462.3593. Sec. 2. [394.307] TEMPORARY FAMILY HEALTH CARE DWELLINGS. Subdivision 1. Definitions. (a) For purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given. (b) "Caregiver" means an individual 18 years of age or older who: (1) provides care for a mentally or physically impaired person; and (2) is a relative, legal guardian, or health care agent of the mentally or physically impaired person for whom the individual is caring. (c) "Instrumental activities of daily living" has the meaning given in section 256B.0659, subdivision 1, paragraph (i). (d) "Mentally or physically impaired person" means a person who is a resident of this state and who requires assistance with two or more instrumental activities of daily living as certified in writing by a physician, a physician assistant, or an advanced practice registered nurse licensed to practice in this state. (e) "Relative" means a spouse, parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, sibling, uncle, aunt, nephew, or niece of the mentally or physically impaired person. Relative includes half, step, and in-law relationships. (f) "Temporary family health care dwelling" means a mobile residential dwelling providing an environment facilitating a caregiver's provision of care for a mentally or physically impaired person that meets the requirements of subdivision 2. Subd. 2. Temporary family health care dwelling. A temporary family health care dwelling must: (1) be primarily assembled at a location other than its site of installation; (2) be no more than 300 gross square feet; (3) not be attached to a permanent foundation; (4) be universally designed and meet state-recognized accessibility standards; (5) provide access to water and electric utilities either by connecting to the utilities that are serving the principal dwelling on the lot or by other comparable means; (6) have exterior materials that are compatible in composition, appearance, and durability to the exterior materials used in standard residential construction; (7) have a minimum insulation rating of R-15; (8) be able to be installed, removed, and transported by a one-ton pickup truck as defined in section 168.002, subdivision 21b, a truck as defined in section 168.002, subdivision 37, or a truck tractor as defined in section 168.002, subdivision 38; (9) be built to either Minnesota Rules, chapter 1360 or 1361, and contain an Industrialized Buildings Commission seal and data plate or to American National Standards Institute Code 119.2; and (10) be equipped with a backflow check valve. Subd. 3. Temporary dwelling permit; application. (a) Unless the county has designated temporary family health care dwellings as permitted uses, a temporary family Page 2 of 6Chapter 111 - Minnesota Session Laws 6/8/2016https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=111&year=2016&type=0 health care dwelling is subject to the provisions in this section. A temporary family health care dwelling that meets the requirements of this section cannot be prohibited by a local ordinance that regulates accessory uses or recreational vehicle parking or storage. (b) The caregiver or relative must apply for a temporary dwelling permit from the county. The permit application must be signed by the primary caregiver, the owner of the property on which the temporary family health care dwelling will be located, and the resident of the property if the property owner does not reside on the property, and include: (1) the name, address, and telephone number of the property owner, the resident of the property if different from the owner, and the primary caregiver responsible for the care of the mentally or physically impaired person; and the name of the mentally or physically impaired person who will live in the temporary family health care dwelling; (2) proof of the provider network from which the mentally or physically impaired person may receive respite care, primary care, or remote patient monitoring services; (3) a written certification that the mentally or physically impaired person requires assistance with two or more instrumental activities of daily living signed by a physician, a physician assistant, or an advanced practice registered nurse licensed to practice in this state; (4) an executed contract for septic service management or other proof of adequate septic service management; (5) an affidavit that the applicant has provided notice to adjacent property owners and residents of the application for the temporary dwelling permit; and (6) a general site map to show the location of the temporary family health care dwelling and other structures on the lot. (c) The temporary family health care dwelling must be located on property where the caregiver or relative resides. A temporary family health care dwelling must comply with all setback requirements that apply to the primary structure and with any maximum floor area ratio limitations that may apply to the primary structure. The temporary family health care dwelling must be located on the lot so that septic services and emergency vehicles can gain access to the temporary family health care dwelling in a safe and timely manner. (d) A temporary family health care dwelling is limited to one occupant who is a mentally or physically impaired person. The person must be identified in the application. Only one temporary family health care dwelling is allowed on a lot. (e) Unless otherwise provided, a temporary family health care dwelling installed under this section must comply with all applicable state law and local ordinances. Subd. 4. Initial permit term; renewal. The initial temporary dwelling permit is valid for six months. The applicant may renew the permit once for an additional six months. Subd. 5. Inspection. The county may require that the permit holder provide evidence of compliance with this section as long as the temporary family health care dwelling remains on the property. The county may inspect the temporary family health care dwelling at reasonable times convenient to the caregiver to determine if the temporary family health care dwelling is occupied and meets the requirements of this section. Subd. 6. Revocation of permit. The county may revoke the temporary dwelling permit if the permit holder violates any requirement of this section. If the county revokes a permit, the permit holder has 60 days from the date of revocation to remove the temporary family health care dwelling. Page 3 of 6Chapter 111 - Minnesota Session Laws 6/8/2016https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=111&year=2016&type=0 Subd. 7. Fee. Unless otherwise specified by an action of the county board, the county may charge a fee of up to $100 for the initial permit and up to $50 for a renewal of the permit. Subd. 8. No public hearing required; application of section 15.99. (a) Due to the time-sensitive nature of issuing a temporary dwelling permit for a temporary family health care dwelling, the county does not have to hold a public hearing on the application. (b) The procedures governing the time limit for deciding an application for the temporary dwelling permit under this section are governed by section 15.99, except as provided in this section. The county has 15 days to issue a permit requested under this section or to deny it, except that if the county board holds regular meetings only once per calendar month the county has 30 days to issue a permit requested under this section or to deny it. If the county receives a written request that does not contain all required information, the applicable 15-day or 30-day limit starts over only if the county sends written notice within five business days of receipt of the request telling the requester what information is missing. The county cannot extend the period of time to decide. Subd. 9. Opt-out. A county may by resolution opt-out of the requirements of this section. Sec. 3. [462.3593] TEMPORARY FAMILY HEALTH CARE DWELLINGS. Subdivision 1. Definitions. (a) For purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given. (b) "Caregiver" means an individual 18 years of age or older who: (1) provides care for a mentally or physically impaired person; and (2) is a relative, legal guardian, or health care agent of the mentally or physically impaired person for whom the individual is caring. (c) "Instrumental activities of daily living" has the meaning given in section 256B.0659, subdivision 1, paragraph (i). (d) "Mentally or physically impaired person" means a person who is a resident of this state and who requires assistance with two or more instrumental activities of daily living as certified in writing by a physician, a physician assistant, or an advanced practice registered nurse licensed to practice in this state. (e) "Relative" means a spouse, parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, sibling, uncle, aunt, nephew, or niece of the mentally or physically impaired person. Relative includes half, step, and in-law relationships. (f) "Temporary family health care dwelling" means a mobile residential dwelling providing an environment facilitating a caregiver's provision of care for a mentally or physically impaired person that meets the requirements of subdivision 2. Subd. 2. Temporary family health care dwelling. A temporary family health care dwelling must: (1) be primarily assembled at a location other than its site of installation; (2) be no more than 300 gross square feet; (3) not be attached to a permanent foundation; (4) be universally designed and meet state-recognized accessibility standards; (5) provide access to water and electric utilities either by connecting to the utilities that are serving the principal dwelling on the lot or by other comparable means; Page 4 of 6Chapter 111 - Minnesota Session Laws 6/8/2016https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=111&year=2016&type=0 (6) have exterior materials that are compatible in composition, appearance, and durability to the exterior materials used in standard residential construction; (7) have a minimum insulation rating of R-15; (8) be able to be installed, removed, and transported by a one-ton pickup truck as defined in section 168.002, subdivision 21b, a truck as defined in section 168.002, subdivision 37, or a truck tractor as defined in section 168.002, subdivision 38; (9) be built to either Minnesota Rules, chapter 1360 or 1361, and contain an Industrialized Buildings Commission seal and data plate or to American National Standards Institute Code 119.2; and (10) be equipped with a backflow check valve. Subd. 3. Temporary dwelling permit; application. (a) Unless the municipality has designated temporary family health care dwellings as permitted uses, a temporary family health care dwelling is subject to the provisions in this section. A temporary family health care dwelling that meets the requirements of this section cannot be prohibited by a local ordinance that regulates accessory uses or recreational vehicle parking or storage. (b) The caregiver or relative must apply for a temporary dwelling permit from the municipality. The permit application must be signed by the primary caregiver, the owner of the property on which the temporary family health care dwelling will be located, and the resident of the property if the property owner does not reside on the property, and include: (1) the name, address, and telephone number of the property owner, the resident of the property if different from the owner, and the primary caregiver responsible for the care of the mentally or physically impaired person; and the name of the mentally or physically impaired person who will live in the temporary family health care dwelling; (2) proof of the provider network from which the mentally or physically impaired person may receive respite care, primary care, or remote patient monitoring services; (3) a written certification that the mentally or physically impaired person requires assistance with two or more instrumental activities of daily living signed by a physician, a physician assistant, or an advanced practice registered nurse licensed to practice in this state; (4) an executed contract for septic service management or other proof of adequate septic service management; (5) an affidavit that the applicant has provided notice to adjacent property owners and residents of the application for the temporary dwelling permit; and (6) a general site map to show the location of the temporary family health care dwelling and other structures on the lot. (c) The temporary family health care dwelling must be located on property where the caregiver or relative resides. A temporary family health care dwelling must comply with all setback requirements that apply to the primary structure and with any maximum floor area ratio limitations that may apply to the primary structure. The temporary family health care dwelling must be located on the lot so that septic services and emergency vehicles can gain access to the temporary family health care dwelling in a safe and timely manner. (d) A temporary family health care dwelling is limited to one occupant who is a mentally or physically impaired person. The person must be identified in the application. Only one temporary family health care dwelling is allowed on a lot. Page 5 of 6Chapter 111 - Minnesota Session Laws 6/8/2016https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=111&year=2016&type=0 (e) Unless otherwise provided, a temporary family health care dwelling installed under this section must comply with all applicable state law, local ordinances, and charter provisions. Subd. 4. Initial permit term; renewal. The initial temporary dwelling permit is valid for six months. The applicant may renew the permit once for an additional six months. Subd. 5. Inspection. The municipality may require that the permit holder provide evidence of compliance with this section as long as the temporary family health care dwelling remains on the property. The municipality may inspect the temporary family health care dwelling at reasonable times convenient to the caregiver to determine if the temporary family health care dwelling is occupied and meets the requirements of this section. Subd. 6. Revocation of permit. The municipality may revoke the temporary dwelling permit if the permit holder violates any requirement of this section. If the municipality revokes a permit, the permit holder has 60 days from the date of revocation to remove the temporary family health care dwelling. Subd. 7. Fee. Unless otherwise provided by ordinance, the municipality may charge a fee of up to $100 for the initial permit and up to $50 for a renewal of the permit. Subd. 8. No public hearing required; application of section 15.99. (a) Due to the time-sensitive nature of issuing a temporary dwelling permit for a temporary family health care dwelling, the municipality does not have to hold a public hearing on the application. (b) The procedures governing the time limit for deciding an application for the temporary dwelling permit under this section are governed by section 15.99, except as provided in this section. The municipality has 15 days to issue a permit requested under this section or to deny it, except that if the statutory or home rule charter city holds regular meetings only once per calendar month the statutory or home rule charter city has 30 days to issue a permit requested under this section or to deny it. If the municipality receives a written request that does not contain all required information, the applicable 15-day or 30- day limit starts over only if the municipality sends written notice within five business days of receipt of the request telling the requester what information is missing. The municipality cannot extend the period of time to decide. Subd. 9. Opt-out. A municipality may by ordinance opt-out of the requirements of this section. Sec. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This act is effective September 1, 2016, and applies to temporary dwelling permit applications made under this act on or after that date. Presented to the governor May 12, 2016 Signed by the governor May 12, 2016, 1:27 p.m. Copyright © 2016 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All rights reserved. Page 6 of 6Chapter 111 - Minnesota Session Laws 6/8/2016https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=111&year=2016&type=0 [Type text] summer grazing at a density of 1 cow, or its equivalent, per 2 acres. Grazable acreage shall not include non-jurisdictional wetlands or slopes over 12%. (1) For purposes of these regulations, the following animal equivalents apply: one slaughter steer, heifer or horse - 1.0; one mature dairy cow - 1.4; one swine over 55 pounds - .4; one sheep -.1; one turkey - .01; one chicken - .01; one duck - .02. (2) For all other animals, the number of animal units shall be defined as the average weight of the animal divided by 1,000 pounds. (1997 Code, § 300.13 Subd. 15) (Am. Ord. 9763, passed 9-19-2000) Penalty, see § 154.999 § 154.915 TEMPORARY FARM DWELLING. (A) No person shall park or occupy a mobile home on the premises of a lot with any occupied dwelling or on any land which is situated outside an approved mobile park, except as provided in this section: The mobile home will be an accessory dwelling unit located on a farm of at least 75 acres in size. (B) (1) The mobile home will be occupied by persons who are either: (a) Members of the family of the persons occupying the principal dwelling house on the premises; or (b) Members of the family engaged in the occupation of farming on the premises as partners or other business associates of the persons living in the principal dwelling house on the premises, and who earn 50% or more of their annual gross income for federal income tax purposes from farming on the premises. (2) The mobile home use will expire and terminate at such time as the persons occupying the mobile home are no longer engaged in farming on the premises as required by § 154.102(B); and (3) At the time of termination, the mobile home temporary farm dwelling shall be removed from the premises within 30 days when practicable. (1997 Code, § 300.13 Subd. 16) § 154.916 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION OFFICE. A temporary mobile home may be permitted in any district if the Zoning Administrator finds the following conditions are satisfied: (A) The mobile home will be utilized as a field headquarters for directing the ongoing construction of a project; (B) Only 1 mobile home shall be permitted on each project; (C) The mobile home shall have adequate sanitary facilities or the site shall have temporary sanitary facilities installed; (D) The mobile home and parking spaces shall adhere to all setbacks for the zoning district and shall only utilize the permitted access driveway; 189 [Type text] (E) The mobile home shall not be used as a dwelling unit; and (F) The mobile home shall be removed within 30 days of the permit termination. (1997 Code, § 300.13 Subd. 17) § 154.917 RECREATION VEHICLES. (A)RECREATIONAL CAMPING VEHICLE includes the following: (1) Any vehicular, portable structure built on a chassis, designed to be used as a temporary dwelling for travel, recreational, and vacation uses; (2) Any structure designed to be mounted on a truck chassis for use as a temporary dwelling for travel, recreation, and vacation; (3) Any portable, temporary dwelling to be used for travel, recreation, and vacation, constructed as an integral part of a self-propelled vehicle; and (4) Any folding structure, mourned on wheels and designed for travel, recreation and vacation use. (B) A recreational vehicle may not be parked on any land outside of an approved camping area or an approved sales lot, except that the parking of 1 unoccupied vehicle in an accessory private garage, building, or in the rear yard of a residential district is permitted, provided that no living quarters shall be maintained or any business practiced in the trailer while it is so parked or stored. (C) A recreational vehicle of the type described in division (A) of this section and owned by a non- resident, guest or visitor may be parked or occupied by the guest or visitor on property on which a permanent dwelling unit is located for a period not to exceed 30 days while visiting the resident of the property. The recreation vehicle shall have self-contained sanitary facilities or standard on-site facilities as required by the community Building Official/Sanitarian. (1997 Code, § 300.13 Subd. 18) § 154.918 RECREATIONAL CAMPING AREA. Any area, whether privately or publicly owned, used on a daily, nightly, weekly, or longer basis for the accommodation of 5 or more tents, or recreational camping vehicles free of charge or for compensation. “Recreational camping area” excludes children’s camps, industrial camps, migrant labor camps, as defined in Minnesota Statutes and State Commissioner of Health Rules, U.S. Forest Service Camps, State Forest Service Camps, State Wildlife Management Areas or state-owned public access area, which are restricted in use to picnicking and boat landing, also referred to as “area” in this chapter. (A)Trailer park operation. No person, firm, or corporation shall develop or operate any recreational camping area without having first obtained a conditional use permit. (B)Application. The application for an approval, in addition to the requirements, shall indicate the name and address of the developer and a general description of the construction schedule and construction costs. The application shall be accompanied by 20 copies of plans, which indicate the following: (1) Location and size of camping area; 190