The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-25-16 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 July 25, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. AGENDA 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approve Agenda 3. Approve Minutes a. June 27, 2016 4. Public Hearings a. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT: A request by the City of Lake Elmo to repeal the Title XV, Chapter 150, Sections 175-190 of the Lake Elmo City Code, as they pertain to open space development, and the adoption of new open space development, and the adoption of new open space development regulations in Title XV, Chapter 154, and to implement reference updates in Chapter 154. b. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT/PUD AMENDMENT: OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC is requesting a zoning map amendment/PUD Amendment to rezone Outlots B (PID 34.029.21.33.0023) and C (PID 34.029.21.33.0024), Boulder Ponds from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR-PUD. c. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT: A request by the City of Lake Elmo to amend, Title XV, Chapter 154 of the Lake Elmo city Code to opt-out of the requirements of Minn. Stat. §462.3593, which defines and regulates Temporary Health Care Dwellings. 5. Business Items a. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: A request by the City of Lake Elmo for an Ordinance Amendment to the Animal Ordinance as it pertains to the keeping of pigeons. 6. Updates a. City Council Updates – July 5, 2016 Meeting i. Vacation of Watermain easement for Auto Owners – passed ii. Amend fence regulation in regards to encroachment agreements – passed iii. Hunting Ordinance - Tabled iv. CPA for Rural Single Family in regards to sanitary sewer – passed v. Moratorium extension – passed. vi. Neighborhood park in Savona neighborhood - Request for Park Commission to look at 2 b. City Council Updates – July 19, 2016 Meeting i. Hunting Ordinance – Input given to Planning Director to bring back to future meeting c. Staff Updates i. Upcoming Meetings:  August 8, 2016  August 22, 2016 d. Commission Concerns 7. Adjourn ***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; 6-27-16 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 27, 2016 Chairman Williams called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dunn, Larson, Griffin, Fields, Dodson, Kreimer, Lundquist and Williams. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Haggard STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Wensman & City Administrator Handt Approve Agenda: Agenda is approved as amended. Approve Minutes: June 13, 2016 M/S/P:Williams/Griffin, move to approve the June 13, 2016 minutes as amended, Vote: 7-0, motion carried, with Kreimer abstaining. The Planning Commission had a discussion regarding some of the Roberts Rule of orders. Public Hearing – Concept PUD Plans Meijer Stores Limited Wensman started his presentation regarding the Meijer Stores Concept plan on 54.69 acres. This property is in the RT Zoning and is in the Shoreland area. This site is guided in the comp plan as medium density and the southern portion is guided as commercial. This is in the Phase 3 sewer area. This project will need a number of other approvals before this plan can go through. It will need a Comprehensive Plan amendment to rezone from MDR to Commercial, RT to PUD, Preliminary and Final PUD Plans and a conditional use permit for some of the uses. This will require a public hearing, 4/5 vote from City Council and Metropolitan Council approval. Wensman went through the details of the project. The store itself is in the shoreland of Kremer Lake. There is 35% impervious allowed within the Shoreland. Plans will require MnDNR approval. There currently is no municipal sanitary sewer available, so the applicant would be fully responsible for the costs to bring it to the site. With a PUD agreement, things need to be negotiated up front, or the underlying zoning district would apply. To approve a PUD agreement, they need to meet at least one of 2 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-27-16 ten objectives. Wensman stated that they need to determine if the exception to the Moratorium has been met. Dodson asked about the moratorium ordinance. It is due to expire in about a month. Dodson also asked why a PUD was necessary. Wensman stated that there ar e a number of uses that are on a very large site and some flexibility might be needed. Dodson also asked about the Shoreland restrictions. Wensman stated that we have an ordinance and it must be in conformance with the DNR standards. Wensman stated that there is nothing currently in our code in regards to PUD’s. Williams asked about how the density of 270 employees would equate to say a business park. Wensman stated that he does not know, but that the Met Council has indicated that they are not too concerned about our employment figures. Fields is wondering what the equivalency for the employment numbers would be for residential numbers. Wensman stated that he has not done the calculations. Williams stated that the nominal calculation would be th at 10 employees would equal 1 rec unit. Kreimer is wondering how long a sketch plan is valid. Wensman does not have that information. Kreimer was wondering what the status of the moratorium is. Wensman stated that there will be a public hearing held on it at the July 5 City Council Meeting. Wensman stated that the County will need to approve the access on Keats. Lundquist asked if they have explored having the entrance off of Hudson Blvd rather than Keats. Dunn does not think it is appropriate to move into phase 3 until phase 1 & 2 are built out. There are phases so that the City can strategically pay for infrastructure. She is also wondering what the traffic count is on Keats and if a traffic light will be in order here. Michael Mondez, Meijer representative, stated this site has been in review with Meijer for over a year now. They have done lots of investigating of the site. There are factors that really decrease the usability of the site. 3 significant wetlands, the 5th Street extension and a 75 foot utility easement. There can be a lot of things that they can do to mitigate some of the runoff because they are in the shoreland area. They are concerned with the restricted access to 5th street for the outlots. He would like to also note that this project is adjacent to phase I, so the sewer availability might not be as big of an issue if they could connect into the phase I sewer. The Planning Commission had some general questions for applicant regarding configuration of site and if residential might be incorporated. The applicant explained how they came to the plan that they did. 3 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-27-16 Public hearing opened at 8:07 pm Tucker Pearce, 9811 7th Street, there was no notification for the Savona neighborhood. He read a petition circulated throughout the Savona neighborhood with 50 plus signatures, which in essence asked for the denial of the Concept plan. Steve Erdman, 9904 7th Street, agrees with Tucker’s statements and added that he works for Target Corporation and there is always a theft component. His fear is that this could overflow to the residential area. He is also concerned about the increase in traffic, especially on 5th street. Even though he is pro growth, what interested him in Lake Elmo was the open space concept and thoughtful growth. Stephenie Lorring, 9918 7th Street, before they built their home, they checked the zoning of this property that the back of their property looks out at. She is concerned that there is no land use transition. She is concerned about the increased traffic, noise and light pollution. She is concerned that the store is open 24 hours, 365 days a year. She does not feel this concept plan preserves the rural character which is why she moved to Lake Elmo. Kyle Heller, 9684 7th Street, grew up in Lake Elmo and is back because he is close to the City, but there is still an open and safe feel to the area. Where he moved from had a Walmart go in right by them and the theft in the area increased significantly. He is not anti growth, but feels this intense use is not a good fit for the site. Robert Elias, 9999 5th Street Lane, his townhome faces this development. He is strongly opposed to this development. They chose Lake Elmo because of the rural and safe feel. He has a petition as well from 16 residents of the townhomes in opposition to the rezone. Jason Jones, thought the presentation from Meijer was good, but there was no talk about the people that live in Lake Elmo. He is pro-growth, but would prefer to see something else in that area. There are many stores like this that they can go to right across the freeway. Tim Lupke, 9989 5th Street, he lived in Woodbury for 20 years and decided he wanted to move to Lake Elmo. Before he purchased his home, he contacted the Plan ning Commission and there was no talk of this use for this property. He feels that very little on the plan fits the Comprehensive Plan. Most of the plan is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. He doesn’t feel it is a good fit coming into the City and going into the park preserve. He feels the zoning should stay the same. There were 2 emails received from 2 of the people that spoke tonight. 4 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-27-16 Public hearing closed at 8:27 pm Kreimer asked the Commission to discuss if they feel this plan would meet the exception of the moratorium. Fields feels that any Commercial development would meet that criteria, but he feels the real issue to discuss would be if this plan would fit this site. Williams agrees with Commissioner Fields and would like to have the definition of the mixed use for this area and what types of uses would be allowed. Dodson feels that the moratorium issue might be a moot point if they are not planning to break ground for 4 years. Dunn feels this is an inappropriate use for this area. The character and feel of this community has significantly been altered in the last 5 years. She thinks this is not appropriate at the entrance of the City to the park preserve and this will bring significant traffic, lighting and safety concerns to the residents in that area. She does not think it should be rezoned as residents in Savona thought it was residential when they purchased. Lundquist agrees with what Commissioner Dunn stated. Larson stated that the future of Lake Elmo is stressed because we do not have enough retail to offset the residential. Where are we going to find room for the retail? There is no place in Lake Elmo that you can buy anything of daily volume and he finds t hat problematic. He thinks that we need to give retail a better chance and some real planning needs to go into finding locations for the retail. Dodson feels that there is a feeling of not in my back yard from the residents in attendance. There was a lot of opposition to Savona when it went in and that is pretty typical of growth. The view to Kramer Lake is going to go away at some point as this property is slated to develop at some time. However, he is not in favor of changing the Comprehensive Plan. Fields has mixed feelings about this development. He welcomes more retail and commercial development because without it, the residential taxes will go up as we introduce infrastructure. He believes though that this project being a 24 hour use is more intense than what people anticipated for this site. Williams is reluctant to lose the residential medium density in the I94 corridor, however, the City would be able to do a Comprehensive Plan amendment rezoning it to Commercial because the adjacent parcel is commercial. He is not in favor of this scale of development on this parcel, but feels it would be appropriate down on Manning. Williams would offer a finding of fact that a Comprehensive Plan amendment would be required to reguide the mixed use parcel to commercial, but because the adjacent parcel is commercial, it would be justified by the Comprehensive Plan. 5 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-27-16 Kreimer stated that the I94 corridor does have areas that are guided commercial. The work group spent a lot of time making sure that the most dense uses were closest to 94 and they become less intense as they get closer to 10th Street and the residential. He does not feel this use is appropriate for this area. Kreimer mentioned that 5th street is a collector road and as this area develops, there will be traffic from other areas using that and it is just not a neighborhood street. Griffin likes the work that Meijers store has done and appreciates that they have taken certain land out of the plan, but she does not feel that this us e is appropriate for this lot. She would encourage them to look at the Manning area. Williams proposed another finding of fact that this overall site does have significant limitations for development in the Southern area. Fields stated that the Hy-Vee store in Oakdale is a little over 90,000 square feet and this is twice the size for comparison. Dodson is wondering if the site is better combined vs. separate from a development standpoint. He is concerned the southern property may not be developable as currently slated. Williams would like to add to his second finding of fact that they are mitigating or avoiding the environmental constraints. He would like to also add as a finding of fact that the surrounding residents are opposed to the development. He also proposes the finding that the applicant has not provided an adequate argument for changing the Comprehensive Plan. Fields says he would agree with statement, but does not feel it is a finding of fact. M/S/: Williams/Griffin, move to recommend denial of the Meijer PUD Concept Plan and outlots. M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to amend the motion to have the finding that the Planning Commission does not feel that this scale of development is appropriate in this location, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Summary of five findings 1) Comprehensive Plan amendment would be required to reguide the mixed use parcel to commercial would be justified by the Comprehensive Plan 2) The site has significant environmental limitations which the Developer has preserved with placement of buildings required by PUD standards 3) The surrounding residents are opposed to the proposal 4) the use is inappropriate without a Comprehensive Plan amendment 5) The Planning Commission does not feel that this scale of development is appropriate in this location. 6 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-27-16 The original motion to deny with amendment and five findings, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Business Item – Open Space Perservation Ordinance Wensman started his presentation by going through the history of this item. There were 2 workshops held by the City Council and the draft being brought to them incorporates what came out of the workshops. The changes to come out of the workshops were to amend the purpose statement, to amend the minimum land area, to eliminate the 4/5 deviation vote, buffer language was added, specific roadway standards, minimum lot sizes for individual and community septic, clarification on how buildable area is determined, individual septic needs to be on private property, and a few other issues related to process. Lundquist asked about water. Wensman stated that it is not addressed, but would depend if it was available to the site. Williams thought that everyone except the NE corner would be on private wells. Wensman stated that there could be more discussion on July 11, 2016, and are looking for a public hearing on this on July 25, 2016. Williams does not feel that there should be greater density than is allowed by the underlying zoning. The developer gets significant benefit by being able to cluster the houses together. Fields feels that there needs to be additional incentives to draw these types of developments. Wensman stated that RR and AG are the underlying zoning district and are 1 per 10 or 1 per 40 as rural estates is no longer a zone that is available to develop. Williams thinks that if townhouses are allowed there should be more open space. Dunn agrees that if there are more homes, there would be more area ava ilable. On page 4, 20 units per 40 needs to be updated to 18 per 40. On page 5 there were some minor typos that should be corrected. Williams is wondering about lot sizes for townhomes and thinks that needs some work. Williams is concerned about page 8 (1) b 2. He would like to see those conservation easements with outside agencies, because they are too easily broken with future City Councils. He is not in favor of the City holding the conservation easements. Dunn would like more information regarding what types of land trusts are available and what their standards are as it is an integral part of the OP ordinance. Williams is wondering if the landscaping section should just refer to the general subdivision landscaping ordinance. Wensman said that he would do a comparison to determine if there was some difference. 7 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-27-16 Kreimer is wondering about the trails and if there needs to be a comment making them public. Wensman stated that Planner Becker is now staffing the Park Commission meetings and is working with them to try to figure out if trails shou ld be part of the park system and tied to the Comprehensive Park Plan. Some of these smaller size development would probably not provide a trail or park unless they were needed as a connection. Williams feels strongly that deviations from standards should result in an improvement meaning that the City should get something in order to give something and should be captured in 154.660. In 3a should say “higher” quality design and 3b should say deviations help to create a “more” unified environment. Williams would also like to add a (d) to this section to say additional or improved amenities such as gathering spaces, extra parks, etc. should be considered. On page 15 section 2b strike the reference to the public hearing and in 2c strike the super-majority vote of the City Council. Kreimer would like to add on page 16 under (2) 3e, primary and secondary location of proposed septic disposal areas. Williams would like to propose a 16 at the top of page 18 to say something like a plan sheet or narrative clearly delineating deviations from the sketch plan due to input from the public or staff. He would like to see at the preliminary plat, how the applicant responded to the comments. Williams is wondering why the preliminary plan is valid for longer at a year vs. the final plan only being valid for 90 days. Wensman stated that it is consistent with the other sections of code. There was discussion regarding the timing if there are phases in a development. Wensman is going to do some research and bring that back to them. Williams asked if the buffer is always an outlot . Wensman stated that currently it is not, which creates problems for a usable back yard. With this version, it is just that the buffer needs to be protected with an easement. There was some discussion regarding the letter of credit. Wensman stated t hat this might not be necessary in the code as it is covered in the developers agreement. Business Item – Temporary Family Health Care Dwelling Wensman started his presentation by stating that in May of 2016 a law was created that permits and regulates temporary family health care dwellings. Unless a city opts out by September 1, 2016, people will be allowed to place these buildings in their back yards. We can opt in and draft our own rules, but then we would need to be consistent with the state statutes. Temporary dwellings are currently not permitted in our code. If we opt in, we need to create standards and clarify between temporary structures and accessory structures. 8 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-27-16 Fields is wondering how long this structure is allowed. It can be there for 6 months with a possible 6 month extension. The current Building Official is not in favor of opting in because there are many things to consider. The structure needs anchoring, it is essentially a mobile home, septic issues and access to water, insulation requirements for MN weather, issue with multiple sewer connections and Met Council SAC determinations, and backflow check valve access. Wensman stated that the next step is to a draft ordinance to either opt in or opt out. He is looking for direction from the Planning Commission. Staff thinks that the practicality of this ordinance seems difficult. The public hearing could be conducted on July 25, 2016 and could go to city Council for approval on August 2, 2016. Williams stated that it seems that the time frame of a year to have on site is not very realistic and it is much more likely that the person would move into the home with a relative rather than into a temporary dwelling. M/S/P: Dunn/Williams, move to opt out of this legislation based on comments from staff, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Fields is wondering what the driving need was for this legislation. He thinks that if this was put in to law, there had to be a reason. Kreimer was wondering if you coul d opt in at a future date. Wensman stated that he believes that to be the case, but if you don’t opt out, you need to follow the state statute. City Council Updates – June 21, 2016 Meeting i) Accessory Structure Ordinance (Fish House) – Passed on consent. ii) Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow sewer connection for RS zoning – The City Council felt it was better to create a new category of RS that is in the MUSA rather than change that whole zone. This will go back to CC on 7/5/16. Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. July 11, 2016 b. July 25, 2016 Commission Concerns Williams is concerned about how revisions from the Planning Commission are being reported to the City Counsil. He is concerned that there is not a clear reporting of how revisions are made. He would propose that in matters where the Planning Commission makes a recommendation, there should be a separate section in the staff report titled 9 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-27-16 “Planning Commission recommendations”. Bullet items or numbered items would be fine. Dunn asked about the schedule for Tartan Park. Wensman stated that he talked about a tentative schedule of 7/25/16 concept review, but we do not have an application yet. Dunn mentioned the tree preservation ordinance and how important it is in the City and she also asked where we were at with the street lights that were out of compliance with the ordinance. Wensman stated that the acorn lights that the City Council has chosen are the closest to the ordinance that we can get. Lundquist talked about how we can identify locations for businesses and is that something we want to pursue? Wensman stated that the Comprehensive Plan does a broad brush in identifying where they can go, but does n ot take into consideration environmental conditions. Lundquist would like the City to spend some time considering how to promote commercial business. Fields stated that it would be difficult to predict the outcome of a development of the scale that the Meijer development is. Usually a business has reasons why it wants to be in a specific location. Meeting adjourned at 11:02 pm Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertman Planning Program Assistant Memorandum DATE: 7-25-16 TO: Lake Elmo Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Wensman, City Planner SUBJECT: Final OP Update Ordinance & Public Hearing 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 brought back to Council last month whereby the ordinance, subject to additional updates, was deemed ready for consideration at a public hearing. ORDINANCE SUMMARY Open space developments in Lake Elmo have always focused on tailoring development requirements to a specific piece of property to ensure the end result was best for the pro perty in question, best for surrounding lands, and best for the City as a whole to maintain its rural character. Based on this premise, the major transition in policy being proposed is to discontinue using CUPs to approve these developments, and instead treat OP as specialized Planned Unit Developments. Since the last time the Planning Commission saw this language, there have been a number of updates and additional components added to the Ordinance. The overall organization of what you are asked to revi ew is outlined below. Ordinance Section #1: This section simply eliminates all of the existing OP regulations in chapter 150. Ordinance Section #2: This section replaces the old OP sections with the word “reserved” to ensure readers understand those sections are now missing on purpose, and they are not missing pages from their code book. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting July 25, 2016 Page 2 of 5 Ordinance Section #3: Most of pages 1 – 4 of this ordinance are dedicated to organizational updates which are needed simply to create a new home for the new OP regulatio ns. Most of the changes assign Article numbers to articles which are currently unnumbered, and amends existing numbers as needed to remain in numerical order. Article references are then updated throughout the Chapter. Ordinance Section #4: This section creates the new Article XVI that will contain the Open Space planned unit development language. The language is organized as follows: 154.650 Purpose This section simply states what the City is trying to accomplish when it reviews and approves “open space planned unit developments.” As requested by the City Council, we beefed up the purpose statement to stress the City’s intent to provide flexibility through this process. 154.651 Intent 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. 154.652 Definitions This section references 11.01 as the City’s location for applicable definitions. 154.653 Initiation of Proceedings This section simply outlines how a landowner can begin the open space PUD process. 154.654 Reflection on the Official Zoning Map This is our first reference to the fact that OP regulations for each development will now be incorporated into an overlay district. Accordingly, issued not addressed by the OP ordinance will be handled by the underlying zoning regulations, so the City will not need to worry about missing details during the approval process. 154.655 Prerequisites for Open Space PUDs Must be zoned Agricultural, Rural Residential, or Rural Estates Must have a minimum of 20 acres (Council directed update) Land must be under single ownership or have legally sufficient documentation if under multiple party control 154.656 Uses Within Open Space PUDs Here we maintained existing language. The only transition proposed is to allow the overlay dist rict regulations to amend specific use provisions that may otherwise be in code. For example, if wayside Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting July 25, 2016 Page 3 of 5 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. The Planning Commission had a split opinion on whether Townhomes should continue to be allowed in OP developments, so the matter was brought to Council for consideration. Council directed staff to maintain Townhomes as an allowed use stating they've worked well in such developments to date. 154.657 Open Space PUD Design This section has undergone extensive review by both the Planning Commission and City Council as it completely reorganizes the City’s existing regulations governing lot design. Based on feedback by both bodies to date, we believe it is nearing (or is in) its final form. The language is intended to ensure the City’s goals are met, and updates the lot development process to more closely follow the process pioneered by Randall Arendt in his book Rural by Design. Of note in this section is the fact that Council elected to eliminate the super-majority vote requirement for modifications in favor of new review criteria in Section 154.660. It was reasoned that Council can elect to amend the zoning code by a simple majority any time in the future, so maintaining a super- majority vote requirement wasn't necessary. The other main change implemented by Council was the increase in density from 18 to 20 homes per 40 buildable acres. The new process for open space PUD design as outlined in this section would be as follows: Step 1: Soil Analysis Completed. All soils identified and ranked as either highly suitable, moderately suitable, or poorly suitable for septic facilities. Step 2: Septic Design Identified. Based on the soils data, the areas for communal septic drain fields must be identified. If individual sites are proposed, the applicant at this step must be able to show adequate soils exist throughout the site for such a proposal. In response to the Commission’s concern about needing a minimum number of units on community systems, Council would like to rely on the City Engineer to provide recommendations on proper system design, and Council would need to make the policy decision on whether to allow community systems on a case -by-case basis. Step 3: Identification of Required Buffers. This new process will REQUIRE that buffers be thought about before anything is designed. Existing requirements are reflected in this language. Step 4: Identification of Building Pads. With areas designated for septic identified and required buffers shown, the developer is to then identify proposed home locations. Locations must minimize needed grading, minimize tree loss, protect historic sites, etc. If individual septic sites are proposed, each home site should also ID the general area for septic outside of easements. If communal drain fields are proposed, each home site should identify the communal drain field to be used. Step 5: Placement of Streets. With building pads and septic areas now located, right-of-way for proposed roadways can now be identified. Again, road placement must minimize changes to the natural topography, limit tree removal, etc. Road design will need to follow adopted City engineering plates. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting July 25, 2016 Page 4 of 5 Step 6: Lot Creation. As a second to last step, the developer will then draw proposed lot lines showing total lot area and total available buildable area per lot given setbacks, septic areas, etc. Existing minimum lot size standards have been maintained. Step 7: Open Space and Parkland Adjustments. With lots now identified, the remaining open space and possible park land dedication must be adjusted to meet minimum requirements. If lots need to be reduced in size or eliminated, that’s what must occur. Parkland and open space minimum requirements are proposed to remain consistent with existing standards. The City Council was asked to provide feedback on the occasional thin strips of land that are used to connect open space areas, but in general there was no opposition to the concept and it was felt that such proposals should be judged on a case by case basis rather than requiring a minimum width. 154.658 Open Space PUD Development Standards Here we maintain the city’s existing regulations relating to open space (must be placed in a conservation easement, must be maintained for its intended purpose, etc), septic systems, building standards, landscaping standards, impervious surface standards, and trail s tandards. In other words, 154.657 includes all of the regulations that dictate how the development is laid out, while Section 154.658 tells the applicant how the development must be constructed and improved. Once again, the super-majority vote requirement for modifications has been eliminated in this section. 154.659 Reserved We ended up relocating language that had been here to another section of code. Labeling this section as “reserved” was the most cost-effective way to accommodate this change. 154.660 Open Space PUD Review Criteria Lists the questions the City will ask when reviewing these types of developments. 154.661 Open Space PUD Review Procedure This lengthy section outlines the process to be used to review open space PUDs from beginning to end. For initial discussion purposes, we are proposing a five (5) step, very transparent process: 1) Open Space PUD Sketch Plan Review – initial review by the City, and determination by Council as to what modifications may be pursued in the future. The process will no longer require a public hearing before the Planning Commission at the sketch plan stage. Likewise, Council no longer must “approve” a sketch plan before an applicant can proceed to PUD preliminary plan if they so choose. 2) Open Space PUD Preliminary Plan Review – traditional preliminary plat & development plan review process. 3) Open Space PUD Final Plan Review – traditional final plat/plan reviews with the additional need for a public hearing to approve the final PUD overlay district ordinance that will govern the development. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting July 25, 2016 Page 5 of 5 Each of these steps outlines the information that must be submitted for a complete application, and outlines the process to be used by the City during the review. 154.662 Open Space PUD Amendments This section deals with how the City will process amendments to both open space PUDs and existing OP developments. 154.663 PUD Cancellation This section outlines the process for cancelling a previous PUD approval. 154.664 Administration This section includes some final rules and regulations deemed important by staff. Ordinance Section #5: Section 5 of this ordinance eliminates language within the zoning ordinance that references the old codes in Chapter 150, and provides a home for all of the specialized setback requirements for existing OP developments. Ordinance Section #6: The final section of this ordinance would add "Open Space Development Overlay District" to the general list of zoning overlay districts found in code . Ordinance Section #7: Section 7 of this ordinance revises 154.350, table 8-1 to list all the existing zoning districts, including old districts, R2, GB, and eliminates zoning districts that do not exist in the Zoning Code. Ordinance Section #8: Adoption date…the standard last section in every ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW Throughout the ordinance, we did our best to highlight comments in yellow to indicate things that have been updated or added since the last draft that appeared before the commission. Please read though this ordinance, be prepared to host a public hearing on this new language, and be ready to make recommendations for Council consideration. ATTACHMENTS:  Ordinance Language Page 1 of 27 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. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 150: General Provisions, by repealing all Open Space Preservation regulations contained in Sections 150.175 through 150.190. SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 150: General Provisions, by adding the following language after Section 150.160, Review and Revocation: Sections 150.161 through 150.199 -- RESERVED SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, to implement needed reference updates as follows:  Articles I and II are restated and incorporated herein unchanged.  The currently un-numbered Article entitled “Zoning Districts,” containing sections 154.030 through 154.036, is hereby restated and incorporated herein unchanged except for the title which is amended to read: “Article III – Zoning Districts”  The currently un-numbered Article entitled “Additional Regulations and Modifications,” containing sections 154.080 through 154.083, is hereby restated and incorporated herein unchanged except for the title which is amended to read: “Article IV – Additional Regulations and Modifications”  Current Articles III (3) through XIII (13) containing sections 154.100 through 154.600, are hereby restated and incorporated herein unchanged except for their Article numbers which are amended to read Articles V (5) through XV (15)  Current Article XIV (14) containing section 154.700 is hereby restated and incorporated herein unchanged except for its Article number which is amended to read Article XVII (17) Page 2 of 27  Current Articles XVI (16) through XVII (17) containing sections 154.750 through 154.800, are hereby restated and incorporated herein unchanged except for their Article numbers which are amended to read Articles XVIII (18) through XIX (19)  The currently un-numbered Article entitled “Design and Performance Standards – Restrictions on Nuisance and Hazardous Activities,” containing sections 154.900 through 154.999, is hereby restated and incorporated herein unchanged except for the title which is amended to read: “Article XX – Design and Performance Standards – Restrictions on Nuisance and Hazardous Activities”  Current Section 154.106(A)(4) is amended as follows: “The proposed use meets all specific development standards for such use listed in Article 7 Article 9 of this Chapter”  Current Section 154.106(E)(1) is amended as follows: “The conditions shall include all specific development standards for such use listed in Article 7 Article 9 of this Chapter”  Current Section 154.202 is amended as follows: “Permits are required for all changes in use and all development activities, with the exception of signs, in compliance with the standards of Article 3, Administration. Signs shall require a sign permit in compliance with Section 151.115 and Article 3.” which shall be governed by the specific requirements of Section 154.212 as may be applicable.”  Current Section 154.210(D)(6) is amended as follows: “Landscaping and Screening. Parking areas shall be screened and landscaped as provided in Article 6 Article 8, Section 154.258”  Current Section 154.305(B)(6) is amended as follows: “Screening of Storage Areas. The storage or display of inoperable or unlicensed vehicles not awaiting service as in subsection (B4) or other equipment, and all trash storage or disposal facilities, shall meet all setback requirements of a structure, and shall be screened from view from adjacent public streets and adjacent residential properties. Screening shall meet the requirements of Article 6 Article 8, Section 154.258.”  Current Section 154.404(introductory paragraph) is amended as follows: “Development of land within the rural districts shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, parking, signs and other considerations as specified in Articles 5, 6 and 7 Articles 7, 8, and 9. The following standards apply to specific uses, and are organized by district.”  Current Section 154.408(E)(1) is amended as follows: “Standards for accessory uses and structures that are permitted in all districts, or in all residential buildings in any district, are listed in Article 7 Article 9, Specific Development Standards. These include uses such as family and group family day care, bed and breakfast facilities, and home occupations, and structures such as swimming pools and solar equipment.” Commented [BGA1]: From this point forward in this section of the ordinance, staff is updating Article and code references as necessary due to the renumbering being completed. Using this provision as an example, all references to "Article 7" in code must now be updated to "Article 9" Commented [BGA2]: This change fixes the noted reference to the correct section. The current code points the reader to regulations on " Culverts in developments with rural section" Page 3 of 27  Current Section 154.454(introductory paragraph) is amended as follows: “Development of land within the urban residential districts shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, parking, signs and other considerations as specified in Articles 5, 6 and 7 Articles 7, 8, and 9. The following standards apply to specific uses, and are organized by district.”  Current Section 154.459 is amended as follows: “Standards for accessory uses and structures that are permitted in all districts, or in all residential buildings in any district, are listed in Article 7 Article 9, Specific Development Standards. These include uses such as family and group family day care, bed and breakfast facilities, and home occupations, and structures such as swimming pools and solar equipment.”  Current Section 154.504(introductory paragraph) is amended as follows: “Development of land within the VMX District shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, and other considerations as specified in Articles 5, 6 and 7 Articles 7, 8, and 9.”  Current Section 154.505(introductory paragraph) is amended as follows: “Development of land within the VMX district shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, parking, signs and other considerations as specified in Articles 5, 6 and 7 Articles 7, 8, and 9. The following standards apply to specific uses; other standards related to design and building type may be found at §154.506.”  Current Section 154.510 is amended as follows: “Standards for accessory uses and structures that are permitted in all districts, or in all residential buildings in any district, are listed in Article 7 Article 9, Specific Development Standards. These include uses such as family and group family day care, bed and breakfast facilities, and home occupations, and structures such as swimming pools and solar equipment.”  Current Section 154.553(introductory paragraph) is amended as follows: “Development of land within the commercial districts shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, and other considerations as specified in Articles 5, 6 and 7 Articles 7, 8, and 9.”  Current Section 154.554(introductory paragraph) is amended as follows: “The following standards apply to specific uses allowed within the Commercial Districts. Other specific use standards are located in Article 7 Article 9.”  Current Section 154.752(introductory paragraph) is amended as follows: “Uses within the PUD may include only those uses generally considered associated with the general land use category shown for the area on the official Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Specific allowed uses and performance standards for each PUD shall be delineated in an ordinance and development plan. The PUD development plan shall identify all the proposed land uses and those uses shall become permitted uses with the acceptance of the development plan. Any change in the list of uses approved in the development plan will be considered an amendment to the PUD, and will follow the procedures specified in Article 35, Section 154.105 , Administration, for zoning amendments.” Commented [BGA3]: This paragraph must be updated as there is no "Article 3, Administration" in the existing code. Page 4 of 27  Current Article XVII, renumbered to Article XIX by this ordinance, is hereby restated and incorporated herein unchanged except for its hierarchy of sections references which shall be amended to follow the following subsection hierarchy: Section Number. Section Title A. Subsection B. Subsection C. Subsection 1. Subsection 2. Subsection 3. Subsection a. Subsection b. Subsection c. Subsection i. Subsection ii. Subsection iii. Subsection  Current Section 154.800(c)(O), changed to 154.800(L) as part of the subsection hierarchy update above, is amended as follows: “Residential planned unit developments shall be permitted in shoreland areas subject to the requirements of Article XVI Article XVIII of this chapter.” All subsections of 154.800(L) are restated and incorporated herein unchanged. SECTION 4. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, to add Article XVI: OPEN SPACE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS Article XVI: OPEN SPACE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS § 154.650 PURPOSE. The purpose of open space planned unit developments is to provide greater development flexibility within rural portions of the community while maintaining the rural character by 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. Commented [BGA4]: Beyond just the Article number, the overall heirarchy of sections within 154.800 doesn't follow the rest of the zoning ordinance. Worse yet, the heirarchy changes mid-way thorugh the Section! To correct this clear formatting error, we are recommending updating each subsection to reflect the zoning code's standard organizatin. Commented [BGA5]: This section simply states what the City is trying to accomplish when it reviews and approves “open space planned unit developments.” Commented [BGA6]: As requested by the City Council, we have beefed up the purpose statement to stress the City’s intent to provide flexibility through this process while maintaining rural character. Page 5 of 27 § 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: (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 Article II, common definitions, words, and phrases used in this Article shall be interpreted so as to give them the same meaning as they have in common usage throughout this code and as may be 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 § 11.02 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 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. Commented [BGA7]: 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. Commented [BGA8]: 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 [BGA9]: This section simply outlines how a landowner can begin the open space PUD process. Commented [BGA10]: 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. Page 6 of 27 § 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 twenty (20) acres. (C) Establishment of an open space planned unit development will be considered only for areas of land 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 Commented [BGA11]: This section sets the minimum requirements that must be met before someone can request an Open Space PUD. The listed prerequisites are existing criteria EXCEPT for the minimum land area which was set at twenty (20) acres by the City Council. Commented [BGA12]: 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 [BGA13]: 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. The City Council was asked to make a final determination, and they directed staff to maintain Townhomes as an allowed use stating they've worked well in such developments to date. Page 7 of 27 (3) Interim Permitted. None (C) Prohibited Uses. All other uses not listed in 154.656(A) or 154.656(B) are hereby prohibited. (D) Use Restrictions and Allowances The final PUD overlay district ordinance may include specific provisions governing uses which supersede underlying zoning and the general PUD regulations herein. § 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 18 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 devel opment 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 on each lot (outside of drainage and utility easements), and must meet the minimum lot size standards outlined herein. Commented [BGA14]: This section has undergone extensive review by both the Planning Commission and City Council as it completely reorganizes the City’s existing regulations governing lot design. Based on feedback by both bodies to date, we believe it is nearing (or is in) its final form with the changes shown herein. Commented [BGA15]: The City Council elected to eliminate the super-majority vote requirement in favor of the new review criteria in Section 154.660. It was reasoned that the Council can elect to amend the zoning code by a simple majority any time in the future, so maintaining it as a component of this review wasn't necessary. Commented [BGA16]: The language within the comprehensive plan 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 Council has instructed staff to increase the permitted density in this section to 20 units per 40 acres of buildable land. Unfortuantely, until/unless a comprehensive plan change is approved, we cannot amend the density in the zoning code. Staff will follow this ordinance up with a second clean-up ordinance once the comp plan change has been implemented. Commented [BGA17]: 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 [BGA18]: The Planning Commission recommended the City consider adopting a minimum number of units before a community septic system can be used. The matter was raised with the City Council, but Council would like to rely on the City Engineer to provide recommendations on proper system design, and Council would ultimately need to make the policy decision on whether to allow community systems on a case-by-case basis. Page 8 of 27 (b) If individual septic tanks which utilize a communal drain field (or 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. (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 § 154.035(B)]. (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) 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. (c) 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: i. Maintain and preserve natural topography, groundcover, significant landmarks, and trees; ii. Minimize cut and fill; iii. Preserve and enhance both internal and external views and vistas; iv. Promote road safety; v. Assure adequate access for fire and rescue vehicles; and Commented [BGA19]: This language has been amended to the three provisions shown since the Planning Commission's last review of this language per Council's direction. Commented [BGA20]: 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. Note that deviations to these buffer standards may be approved by Council using the review criteria in Section 154.660. Within this new framework, Council will now 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 (a detail that can be specifically written into the overlay district ordinance governing the lots being created). Commented [BGA21]: As a primary step in lot design, we will be requiring the developer to identify general locations that can accommodate primary and secondary septic sites if the lots are to contain their own systems. Detailed information would be needed during the Preliminary Plan stage. Page 9 of 27 vi. Assure and promote adequate vehicular circulation both within the development and with adjacent neighborhoods. (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) Lots i. Single-family lots being served by individual septic tanks and drain fields shall be a minimum of one (1) acre in size; ii. 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; iii. All land reserved for Communal septic system use shall be located within a dedicated Outlot to be owned by the homeowners association (HOA) of the development. iv. 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 Buildable area on each proposed lot shall be shown. Buildable area shall exclude land within the following areas: i. Required buffers from adjacent lands [see § 154.035(B)] ii. Wetlands and required wetland buffers; iii. Required setbacks from waterbodies and non-buildable land per Shoreland district regulations [see Article XIX] ; iv. Steep slopes; v. Drainage swales, stormwater ponds, and other association owned and maintained stormwater management facilities; vi. Easements; and Commented [BGA22]: 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. Sign design and specifications should be in conformance with the City's adopted sign standards rather than relisting such standards here. Commented [BGA23]: 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 [BGA24]: This language was clarified to ensure developers understood what constituted buildable land on each lot. Page 10 of 27 vii. Land within the following setbacks: HOUSING TYPE Single Family Homes Townhomes Front Yard 30 20 Side Yard 15 feet or 10% of lot width Corner Lot Front Yard 30 Corner Lot Side Yard 30 Rear Yard 20 Well from Septic Tank 50 viii. 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. (7) Open Space and Parkland Adjustments (a) Open Space i. 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. ii. Not less than 60% of the preserved open space shall be in contiguous parcels which are five (5) or more acres in size. iii. Preserved open space parcels shall be contiguous with preserved open space or public park land on adjacent parcels. (b) Parkland i. Parks and recreational facilities shall be provided in addition to preserved open space as specified in the Lake Elmo Parks Plan. ii. 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. iii. Any dedication shall be consistent with the dedication and fee-in-lieu standards specified in Chapter 153. Commented [BGA25]: 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 [BGA26]: The open space provisions are existing requirements. The City Council was asked to provide feedback on the occasional thin strips of land that are used to connect open space areas, but in general there was no opposition to the concept and it was felt that such proposals should be judged on a case by case basis rather than requiring a minimum width. Commented [BGA27]: The current standard in code is 60% of the dedicated open space must be in contiguous parcels that are at least 1/4 of the minimum land area needed for OP development (i.e. 40 acres minimum requires that 60% of the open space be in contiguous parcels of at least 10 acres). As the minimum land area has been reduced from 40 acres to 20 acres, we have adjusted the "contiguous parcel" size down accordingly. Page 11 of 27 § 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 listed in § 154.650. (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: i. 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 ii. 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 § 154.661(3) for an open space PUD Final Plan. (2) Septic System Design Standards (a) In General The placement and design of all septic systems shall conform to the requirements of Washington County. (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 easement. Commented [BGA28]: 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 [BGA29]: Again, the super-majority vote was eliminated in favor of new review criteria in Section 154.660 Commented [BGA30]: 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 [BGA31]: Septic language now refers to Washington County as they oversee the City's on-site systems & permitting. Commented [BGA32]: This new requirements would mandate that all individual septic systems be located on private property. Page 12 of 27 (c) Communal Drain Fields. i. Communal drain fields may be partially or completely located in an area designated as preserved open space provided the ground cover is restored to its natural condition after installation, and recreational uses are prohibited above or within 50 feet of communal drain fields or as approved by the City Engineer. ii. 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. (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 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. Commented [BGA33]: Existing language regarding wetland treatment systems has been eliminated as directed by the City Council. The new ordinance will be silent on such systems, and Engineering will be asked for guidance if such a system is proposed in the future. Commented [BGA34]: The Planning Commission questioned whether we should specifically exclude historic structures from this requirement. Both staff and the City Council agree that no such exclusion is necessary. Historic structures taller than 22 feet would be legal nonconforming structures subject to protections of State Statute. Commented [BGA35]: As directed, the optional landscaping standards staff offered for consideration have been eliminated in favor of the existing standards. Commented [BGA36]: Staff did not recommend changes to the existing language as it seemingly has been working. This should be monitored though and updated if problems are encountered. Page 13 of 27 (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. § 154.659 Reserved § 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. Commented [BGA37]: The “pathway” standards that are currently lumped into a single paragraph are now broken apart in this new ordinance. We are not recommending incorporation of specific standards as the City should rely on its standard engineering plates to identify how trails will fit into available roadway designs. Commented [BGA38]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 3 Commented [BGA39]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 4 Commented [BGA40]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 1 Commented [BGA41]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 1 Commented [BGA42]: From current Section 150.180(B)(2)(f), sentence 2 Commented [BGA43]: When the Zoning code is eventually reorganized, this Section will likely be relocated to a more appropriate location in Chapter 154, but for now it is included here. Commented [BGA44]: This section 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. Page 14 of 27 § 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; 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 and § 154.658 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. Commented [BGA45]: 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. The developer open houses considered at the beginning of this process have been eliminated. Page 15 of 27 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; 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); Page 16 of 27 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. 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 discussing 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 and § 154.658, 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. Commented [BGA46]: The need for a sketch plan public hearing before the Planning Commission was eliminated by the City Council. Commented [BGA47]: 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. Page 17 of 27 (d) Effect of a PUD Sketch Plan Review 1. 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. 2. Proposed modifications that receive a majority vote of support from Council may be requested as part of the future PUD Preliminary Plan application, but support to pursue the modification as part of the PUD Sketch Plan in no way guarantees that the modification will be approved as part of the 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. (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, § 1102.01(C) and § 1102.02. 2. 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.); Commented [BGA48]: This subsection clarifies EXACTLY what a developer gets as a result of the sketch plan process. Commented [BGA49]: Sketch Plan reviews may remain valid for up to 1.5 years. Commented [BGA50]: The City will not accept a preliminary plan application unless a valid sketch plan is in place. Page 18 of 27 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; 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 3. Colored renderings which detail the building materials being used and clearly communicate the look and design of the proposed building(s); 4. Proposed architectural and performance standards for the development; 5. 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; 6. A utility plan providing all information as required by Public Works, the City Engineer, and/or the Director of Planning; 7. 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; 8. The location and detail of signage providing all pertinent information necessary to determine compliance with § 154.212; 9. A tree preservation plan as required by § 154.257; Page 19 of 27 10. A landscape plan, including preliminary sketches of how the landscaping will look, prepared by a qualified professional providing all information outlined in § 154.258; 11. 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; 12. A plan sheet or narrative clearly delineating all features being modified from standard open space PUD regulations; 13. Common Interest Community Association documents including bylaws, deed restrictions, covenants, and proposed conservation easements. 14. Any other information as directed by the Director of Planning. (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 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 § 154.660. 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. Commented [BGA51]: 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 [BGA52]: This subsection clarifies EXACTLY what a developer gets as a result of the Preliminary Plan process. Commented [BGA53]: Preliminary Plan approvals may remain valid for up to 2.0 years. Page 20 of 27 (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 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 City Code § 153.08; 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. Commented [BGA54]: 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 [BGA55]: Here we denote that easements may be created to memorialize buffer areas on individual lots. Page 21 of 27 (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. 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 [BGA56]: 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 22 of 27 (d) Time Limit 1. A Planned Unit Development shall be validated by the applicant through the commencement of construction or establishment of the authorized use(s), subject to the permit requirements 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. (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 § 154.105. 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. Commented [BGA57]: This section will deal with how the City will process amendments to both open space PUDs and existing OP developments. Page 23 of 27 (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 (1) 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. (2) An application to amend an existing OP development shall require the development to be converted into an open space PUD beginning at open space PUD Preliminary Plan. (a) Replatting of lots will only be required if the Director of Planning determines such is necessary to implement the requested change. (b) The resulting overlay zoning district shall be applied to all properties within the OP development being amended. § 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; (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. Commented [BGA58]: This section has been updated to address pre-existing OP Developments. Commented [BGA59]: This section outlines the process for cancelling a previous PUD approval. Commented [BGA60]: This section includes some final rules and regulations deemed important by staff. Page 24 of 27 (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 5. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, Article III: ZONING DISTRICTS, Section 154.035 OP- Open Space Preservation District as follows: § 154.035 OP – OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION DISTRICT. Provisions governing the OP Open Space Preservation District are codified at §§ 150.175 through 150.189. (A) OP District Discontinued Provisions regulating the OP Open Space Preservation District were repealed and replaced with the regulations now in Article XVI: Open Space Planned Unit Developments. (B) 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 Commented [BGA61]: Section 5 of this ordinance eliminates language within the zoning ordinance that references the old codes in Chapter 150, and provides a home for all of the specialized setback requirements for existing OP developments. Page 25 of 27 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 SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, Section 154.036 as follows: § 154.036 OZD - OVERLAY ZONING USE DISTRICT. The following overlay districts are designed to promote orderly development or to protect some specific sensitive natural resources. These district regulations are in addition to, rather than in lieu of, regulations imposed by the existing basic zoning use districts. These districts are defined and established as follows: A. Flood Plain – See §§ 151.01 through 151.14 of this Code; B. Restrictive Soils Overlay District – See §§ 150.200 through 150.203 of this Code; C. Wetland Protection and Preservation Overlay District – See §§ 150.215 through 150.219 of this Code; D. Shoreland District – See §§ 150.250154.800 through 150.257 of this Code; E. Interstate Corridor Overlay District – See §§ 150.230 through 150.238 of this Code; and F. Airport (reserved).; and F.G. Open Space Development Overlay District – See §§ 150.175 through 150.190 of this Code Commented [BGA62]: The final section of this ordinance would add "Open Space Development Overlay District" to the general list of zoning overlay districts found in code. Formatted: Tab stops: 0.63", Left + Not at 0.38" Page 26 of 27 SECTION 7. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, Section 154.350 as follows: § 154.350 DIVISION INTO DISTRICTS. A. All Areas Zoned. The incorporated areas of Lake Elmo are hereby divided into the following zoning districts: Table 8-1: Zoning Districts Zoning District Reference R-2 One and Two Family Residential 154.033 GB General Business 154.034 A Agriculture 154.400 Article XI RR Rural Residential 154.400 Article XI RT Rural Development Transitional 154.400 Article XI RS Rural Single Family 154.400 Article XI RE Residential Estate 154.400 Article XI OP Open Space Preservation 150.175 LDR Urban Low Density Residential 154.450 Article XII MDR Urban Medium Density Residential 154.450 Article XII HDR Urban High Density Residential 154.450 Article XII VMX Village Center - Mixed Use 154.500 Article XIII C Commercial 154.550 Article XIV CC Convenience Commercial 154.550 Article XIV LC Neighborhood Office/Limited Commercial 154.550 Article XIV BP Business Park/Light Manufacturing 154.550 Article XIV P PF Civic/Public Public Facilities 154.600 Article XV OSP Open Space and Parks 154.600 OP-A Open Space Preservation - Alternative Density 154.700 Page 27 of 27 SECTION 8. Adoption Date This Ordinance No. xx-xxx was adopted on this ______ day of July 2016, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. _________________________________ Mayor Mike Pearson ATTEST: __________________________________ Kristina Handt City Administrator This Ordinance No xx-xxx was published on the ____ day of _____________________, 2016. CITY OF LAKE ELMO RESOLUTION NO. 2016-___ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. xx-xxx BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. xx-xxx, 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; and WHEREAS, the ordinance is lengthy; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the city council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Lake Elmo that the city administrator shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. xx-xxx to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance: Public Notice The City Council of the city of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. xx-xxx. The ordinance repeals existing open space development regulations within chapter 150, and adopts new open space planned unit development regulations in chapter 154. The new regulations are largely based on the City’s long-standing OP development codes, but have been updated to implement lessons learned from existing OP development over the past twenty years, and to ensure these developments are meeting the City’s expectations. The main changes being implemented include a revised methodology for the design of open space developments, and implementation of a more standardized development review process. Additionally, Open Space planned unit developments will now require the establishment of an overlay district over such areas to organize the unique regulations governing these neighborhoods. To properly fit these new regulations into the City’s zoning code, this ordinance also implements a number of organizational/numbering changes throughout Chapter 154. The full text of Ordinance No. xx-xxx is available for inspection at Lake Elmo city hall during regular business hours. Mayor Mike Pearson BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Lake Elmo that the city administrator keep a copy of the ordinance in her office at city hall for public inspection and that he post a full copy of the ordinance in a public place within the city. Dated: ________________ ___, 20___. ___________________________________ Mayor Mike Pearson ATTEST: ____________________________________ Kristina Handt City Administrator (SEAL) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _____________________ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 7/25/16 AGENDA ITEM: 4b– PUBLIC HEAR ITEM CASE # 2016-24 ITEM: Rezoning/PUD Amendment – Boulder Ponds SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director REVIEWED BY: Emily Becker, City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC is requesting approval of a rezoning/PUD amendment to the Boulder Ponds PUD to rezone Outlots B (PID#34.029.21.33.0023) and C (PID# 34.029.21.33.0024), Boulder Ponds from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR-PUD. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC Property Owners: OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC Location: Jade Trail North, South of 5th Street Request: rezoning/PUD amendment to the Boulder Ponds PUD to rezone Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR-PUD Existing Land Use and Zoning: Undeveloped outlots - Commercial PUD/MDR PUD Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: LDR to the north, vacant - Commercial PUD outlot to the east, BP to the west, vacant Commercial PUD outlot to the south Comprehensive Plan: MDR/Commercial History: Boulder Ponds Preliminary Plat was approved on 7/28/14. The subject parcels were rezoned from RT to Commercial PUD/MDR PUD on 4/21/15. Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 6/27/16 60 Day Deadline – 8/26/16 Extension Letter Mailed – N/A 120 Day Deadline – N/A Applicable Regulations: Article XVI, Chapter 154, Sections 750-760, PUD Regulations Article X – Urban Residential Districts Planning Commission Meeting 7/25/16 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – ACTION ITEM REQUEST DETAILS: OP4 Boulder Ponds is requesting a Rezoning/PUD Amendment of two parcels, Outlot B and C, from Commerical/PUD and MDR/PUD respectively, to HDR/PUD in order to better market the parcels for a future Senior Housing Development. Outlot B is presently zoned for Commercial/PUD and is 1.44 acres in size. Outlot C is presently zoned for MDR/PUD and is 2.24 acres in size. The applicant would like to rezone both parcels to HDR/PUD and market them together for a proposed senior housing project. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS: According to Article XVI, Chapter 15, Section 757, Subd C of the Planned Unit Development Code, PUD Amendments shall be authorized by an amendment of the final development plan under the procedures for zoning amendment in Article III of the City Code of Ordinances. The rationale for the housing density in the MDR portion of Boulder Ponds was described in the 12/09/13 Planning Report for the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan: The medium density area, which is approximately 10.1 acres, contains 81 residential units (17 single family, 64 multi-family), resulting in a gross density of 7.98 units per acre. It should be noted that this density figure is slightly higher than what is guided by the Comprehensive Plan. However, given that the proposed development is a PUD, and that the amount of land guided for medium density residential development on these parcels by the Comprehensive Plan is much greater, Staff has determined that the proposed Concept Plan meets the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. To explain Staff’s reasoning for this determination in another way, the proposed Concept Plan decreases the amount of total land guided for medium density development by over 20 acres by moving the collector road south. The slight increase in density above the allowed range per the Comp Plan is balanced by the significant reduction in the amount of land guided medium density. To put it in simple terms, by using the low end of gross density ranges in the Comp Plan, these parcels were guided to have 195 total residential units (not accounting for road right-of-way), whereas the proposed PUD Concept Plan includes 157 total units. Overall, the proposed PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the intent of the land use and density requirements as guided by the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The rationale for the density is sound, however, when it recommending subsequent zoning for the sites, Staff had recommended LDR/PUD for the single family cul-de-sac, Jade Circle North, and MDR/PUD for the senior housing parcel (Outlot C). Outlot B was zoned Commercial PUD. The LDR/PUD zoning is the correct zoning for the single family housing on Jade Circle North just south of 5th Street, but the remaining 2.240 acre parcel (Outlot C) was zoned MDR/PUD for a planned 64 unit Senior Housing project. The zoning code, Section 154.453, Subdivision A, allows: Averaging of Lot Area. When lots are clustered within a development to provide common open space, the open space may be used to calculate an average density per lot to determine compliance with the individual lot area requirements. To determine the allowed density for Outlot C, A 64-unit project on a 2.240 acres site (and 0.23 acres of corresponding open space) would have a density of 25.91 units per acre, exceeding the 7- unit per acres allowed by the underlying MDR zoning, or 8.4-units per acre if 20% density bonus Planning Commission Meeting 7/25/16 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – ACTION ITEM was applied through the PUD. The HDR zoning would provide a 15-units per acre base density, or 18-units per acre if 20% density bonus was applied through the PUD. Even with HDR/PUD zoning, the 64-unit project would exceed the density allowable on the 2.47 acre site (.23 acres of open space). Therefore, OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC is proposing to rezone Outlot B (1.44 acres) from Commercial/PUD to HDR/PUD to add to the Senior Housing project area. With the addition of Outlot B, the 64-unit senior housing project be 4.18 acres (3.68 acres outlot area + .5 acres of open space) in size with a density of 15-units per acre. HDR/PUD is the appropriate zoning district for the proposed use on Outlots B and C combined. Senior housing (congregate housing) is a conditional use in both the Commercial and HDR Zoning Districts, so although the request is for a rezoning from Commercial/PUD to HDR/PUD, the proposed underlying land use remains essentially the same. In order to proceed with a senior housing project on the Oulots B and C the following would be required: •Final PUD Plans and Final Plat (combining the two outlots into a single lot) •Conditional Use Permit DRAFT FINDINGS: In order to approve a rezoning, the Planning Commission shall consider findings are shall submit the same with its recommendation to the City Council. Staff suggests the following findings: 1. The Rezoning/PUD Amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject property. 2. The proposed land use, Senior Housing, is a conditional use in both the Commercial and HDR zoning districts, so the underlying land use will remain unchanged. 3. The proposed HDR/PUD zoning is appropriate for the proposed senior housing density. 4. The proposed PUD/Amendment is consistent with the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan and Preliminary PUD Plans. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Rezoning/PUD Amendment for Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds, rezoning from Commercial/PUD and MDR/PUD, respectively, to HDR/PUD with the following motion: “Move to recommend approval of the Rezoning/PUD Amendment for Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds from Commercial/PUD and MDR/PUD, respectively, to HDR/PUD with the following motion based on the findings in the Staff report.” ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Meeting 7/25/16 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM __ – ACTION ITEM •Application and Narrative •Planning Commission Report – Boulder Ponds PUD – Concept Plan 12/09/16 •Housing Density Analysis (from 12/09/16 Concept Plan) 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 Boulder Ponds Preliminary PUD Amendment & Zoning Amendment Application 1 NARRATIVE Zoning Amendment & Preliminary PUD Amendment Project Representatives and Contact Information. LANDOWNER/ OP4 Boulder Ponds, LLC DEVELOPER c/o The Excelsior Group, LLC 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Ben Schmidt, Vice President 952.525.3225 Ben.Schmidt@ExcelsiroLLC.com Deb Ridgeway, Asset Manager 952.525.3223 Deb.Ridgeway@ExelsiorLLC.com Property Address, Zoning, Parcel Size, PID and Legal Description Outlot B, Boulder Ponds Outlot C, Boulder Ponds ADDRESS XXXX Hudson Blvd XXXX Hudson Blvd CURRENT ZONING Commercial - PUD MDR - PUD PARCEL SIZE Acres 1.72 2.46 Sq. Ft 2,591,320.2 6,098.4 PIDs 34-029-21-33-0023 34-029-21-33-0024 Boulder Ponds Preliminary PUD Amendment & Zoning Amendment Application 2 Boulder Ponds is a Planned Unit Development that was approved to include a variety of land uses, including single family residential, multifamily residential and commercial. The first phase of street and utility installation is complete to serve 20 Villa lots, 27 single family lots and 10 acres of commercial and multifamily. During the preliminary plat process, the 2.42 multifamily site (Outlot C) was presented as a 64-unit multifamily building. Based on the current zoning of medium density residential (7 units per acre), Outlot C is allowed only 15.4 units, which is inconsistent with the PUD approval. In addition to remedying this inconsistency, there is a desire to rezone Outlot B to allow multifamily on the entire 4.18 acres. Therefore, this application requests approval to amend the zoning of Outlots B & C, Boulders Ponds from Commercial and MDR-PUD to HDR-PUD and allow for a maximum 112 multifamily units. This is based on the analysis of the current approved plan with 98 units versus the 210.4 units that could be allowed per the zoning code. The accompanying plan further illustrates this. There is no proposed layout at this time, but when a plan is created, Final Plat, Final PUD and Conditional Use Permit approvals will be required providing adequate oversight of the specific site plans. In conclusion, Boulder Ponds offers a uniquely planned mixed-use neighborhood where the land uses provide a seamless transition from commercial to low density residential. The high density use between the commercial and lower density homes creates a complementary buffer and generally a more desirable and overall more viable neighborhood for Lake Elmo. PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 7/25/2016 AGENDA ITEM: 4c – PUBLIC HEARING CASE # 26 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. The bill was first introduced on March 10, 2016 by Senators Hoffman, Rosen, Eken, Koenen, and Abeler. 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. The Statute has the following key components: •Creates a new type of permit referred to as a temporary dwelling permit that has a six-month duration, with an option to extend the permit for six months. •Requires that the permit be for a property where the caregiver or relative resides. •Allows modular and manufactured housing (instead of just recreational vehicles) to use this permit process as long as the unit meets all of the listed criteria. •Lists the criteria for the structure and the information required in the permit application. •Addresses sewer safety issues with required backflow valves and advance verification of septic service contracts. •Requires the inclusion of site maps showing where the unit will be placed and notification of adjacent neighbors prior to application. •Requires applications to specify the individual authorized to live in the unit. •Applies the permit approval process found in Minnesota Statutes, section 15.99, but allows the local government unit only 15 days to make a decision on granting the permit (no extension). It waives the public hearing requirement and allows the clock to be restarted if an application is deemed incomplete, as long as the applicant is notified of how the application is incomplete within five days. A 30-day decision is allowed if the regular council meeting occurs only once a month. •Requires unit placement to meet existing stormwater, shoreland, setback, and easement requirements. 2 PUBLIC HEARING •A temporary family health care dwelling that meets the requirements of Sections 2 and 3 of the Statute cannot be prohibited by local ordinances that regulate accessory uses or recreational vehicle parking or storage. •Sets a default permit fee level that may be replaced by a local ordinance. •Allows cities to pass an ordinance opting out of using this new permitting system. Unless a city chooses not to participate in this program by passing an ordinance specifically opting out, the law will require the city to issue permits to qualified applicants starting on Sept. 1, 2016. A permit can be denied for appropriate cause. The law lists the information required and the requirements that may be considered in that decision. REQUEST DETAILS: The aforementioned was a business agenda item at the Planning Commission meeting on June 27, 2016. At this meeting, the Planning Commission held a discussion and directed Staff to prepare an ordinance opting out of Minn. Stat. 462.3593. This draft ordinance is attached. The draft ordinance has the City of Lake Elmo opting out of the requirements of Sections 2 and 3 of the Statute. By adopting this ordinance, a city is not required to allow temporary health care dwellings that meet the requirements of the Statute. If the City does not adopt the ordinance, it is not allowed to prohibit temporary health care dwellings through local ordinance regulations of accessory uses and recreational vehicles that meet the Statute standards. PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES/REVIEW AND ANALYSIS: Not Addressed in Zoning Code. The City’s 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; the classification of a secondary dwelling specifically states that it does not include a manufactured home. Additionally, temporary health care dwellings are not listed as an accessory use. When uses are not so indicated as permitted or conditional uses in a given zoning district, they are considered prohibited. Therefore, because the Zoning Code is silent in regards to temporary health care dwellings, and if the ordinance to opt out of Minn. Stat. 462.3593 is adopted, temporary health care dwellings not meeting the standards set forth in the Design and Performance Standards Articles of the Zoning Code are prohibited. 3 PUBLIC HEARING Future Consideration. The Planning Commission may consider if temporary health care dwellings should be listed as conditional or permitted uses in (a) certain zoning district(s). If it is determined that they should be, standards should be set forth. RECCOMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing and recommend approval of the Ord-08__ that opts out of Minn. Stat. 462.3593 through the following motion: “Move to recommend approval of Ord-08__ opting-out of the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.3593.” ATTACHMENTS: •Chapter 111 •History of Session Law Chapter: 111 •Sample Ordinance Drafted by League of MN Cities to Opt Out of MS 462.3593 •Draft Ord. 08-__ •Temporary Dwelling Language in Zoning Code 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 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 SF 2555 Status in the Senate for the 89th Legislature (2015 - 2016) https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?b=Senate&f=SF2555&y=2016&ssn=0[6/28/2016 10:58:24 AM] MN Legislature Get Connected About the Legislature Mobile Site Minnesota State Legislature Minnesota Senate House Senate Joint Schedules Legislators Committees Bills Law Multimedia Publications SF 2555 pg. 4960 Intro pg. 5675a 1 pg. 5715a 2 pg. 6535a 3 pg. 6538 pg. 6572a 4 pg. 6573 vote: 50-15 pg. 7006 pg. 7050 pg. 7050 pg. 7894 pg. 7896 pg. 7908 Status in the Senate for the 89th Legislature (2015 - 2016) Current bill text: 4th Engrossment Add SF 2555 to MyBills Version List Companion: HF2497; Companion Text House Search Revisor number: 16-5628 Session Law Chapter: 111 Long Description Committee Hearings and Actions Senate Counsel & Research Summary Description Temporary family health care dwellings zoning regulation; temporary dwelling permits establishment Authors Hoffman ; Rosen ; Eken ; Koenen ; Abeler House Authors Peterson ; Loonan ; Newton ; Pugh ; Laine ; Schultz Actions Separated Chronological Senate 03/10/2016 Introduction and first reading 03/10/2016 Referred to State and Local Government 04/06/2016 Comm report: To pass as amended and re-refer to Health, Human Services and Housing 04/07/2016 Comm report: To pass as amended and re-refer to Finance 04/28/2016 Comm report: To pass as amended 04/28/2016 Second reading 05/02/2016 Special Order: Amended 05/02/2016 Third reading Passed 05/12/2016 Returned from House Presentment date 05/12/16 05/17/2016 Governor's action Approval 05/12/16 05/17/2016 Secretary of State Chapter 111 05/12/16 Effective date 09/01/16 House 05/04/2016 Received from Senate 05/04/2016 Senate file first reading, referred for comparison HF 2497 05/05/2016 Bills not identical, SF substituted on General Register Bills SF 2555 Status in the Senate for the 89th Legislature (2015 - 2016) https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?b=Senate&f=SF2555&y=2016&ssn=0[6/28/2016 10:58:24 AM] ABOUT THE LEGISLATURE FAQ Guide to the Legislative Process Historical Statistics Employment/Internships Visiting the Capitol Maps District Finder Accessibility For all comments concerninglegislation or issues: Contact your House Member Contact your Senator For bill status information,questions, or corrections: Contact Senate Index at 651-296-5560 Submit website comments CONTACT US GET CONNECTED MyBills E-mail Updates & RSS Feeds House News Senate News 700 State Office Building, 100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., St. Paul, MN 55155 ♦ Phone: (651) 296-2868 ♦ TTY: 1-800-627-3529 ♦ Fax: (651) 296-0569 pg. 7909 pg. 7991 pg. 8013 pg. 8014 vote: 113-17 pg. 8163 05/05/2016 Second reading 05/09/2016 House rule 1.21, placed on Calendar for the Day Wednesday, May 11, 2016 05/11/2016 Third reading 05/11/2016 Bill was passed Presented to Governor 05/12/16 Governor approval 5/12/2016 Secretary of State, Filed 05/12/16 Chapter number 111 ORDINANCE NO.____________ CITY OF ____________________ AN ORDINANCE OPTING-OUT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 462.3593 WHEREAS, on May 12, 2016, Governor Dayton signed into law the creation and regulation of temporary family health care dwellings, codified at Minn. Stat. § 462.3593, which permit and regulate temporary family health care dwellings; WHEREAS, subdivision 9 of Minn. Stat. §462.3593 allows cities to “opt out” of those regulations; THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF __________________, ORDAINS as follows: Section _____. City Code, Section __________ is amended as follows: OPT-OUT OF MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 462.3593: SECTION ___________. Pursuant to authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.3593, subdivision 9, the City of __________ opts-out of the requirements of Minn. Stat. §462.3593, which defines and regulates Temporary Family Health Care Dwellings. SECTION__________. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this _______day of _______________________, 2016, by the City Council of the City of ____________. CITY OF _____________________________ By: _____________________________________ ATTEST: _______________________________ 482548v2 AMB LA515-4 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OPTING-OUT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 462.3593 SECTION 1. Section 301: Standards for Residential and Related Uses, Article 7: Specific Development Standards; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Title XV: Land Usage of the Lake Elmo City Code of Ordinances is amended by adding the following: E. Temporary Health Care Dwellings 1. Pursuant to authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.3593, subdivision 9, the City opts-out of the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.3593, which defines and regulates temporary family health care dwellings. By exercising this authority, the City is prohibiting the use of temporary family health care dwellings within the City. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance No. ____ was adopted on this _____ day of _____________, 2016, by a vote of __ Ayes and __ Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ___________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance ________ was published on the _____ day of _________________, 2016. [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