Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Minutes; 10-24-16Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 24, 2016 Chairman Kreimer called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Larson, Griffin, Dodson, Williams, Dunn, Kreimer, Haggard and Lundquist COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Fields STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Wensman and City Administrator Handt Approve Agenda: M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to approve the Agenda as amended, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Approve Minutes: October 10, 2016 M/S/P: Williams/Lundquist, move to approve the October 10, 2016 minutes as amended, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing – Sign Variance River Country Cooperative Wensman started his presentation for a variance for River Country Cooperative (Holiday Station on Manning). They are requesting a variance from the maximum surface area requirements of wall and canopy signs. After the realignment of Manning, the view from the road will be on the back side of the building. Wensman went through the findings. Staff feels that all of the variance requirements are met which include unique circumstances, character of locality, adjacent properties and traffic. Notices were sent to properties within 350 feet and no comments were received. Staff is recommending approval subject to the following conditions 1) the new locations of the ground and pylon signs shall be approved by the City and must adhere to all setback and other code requirements 2) all lighting must adhere to the City’s lighting, glare control and exterior lighting standards and 3) the erected signs shall not exceed the proposed square footage described herein. Dodson asked how much more lighting is added with this. Wensman stated that the wall signs are the only ones that have more lighting and they will have to submit a lighting plan to comply with the code. The lighting is not part of the variance. 2 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 The Planning Commission discussed how the new access would work. Public hearing opened at 7:18 pm No one spoke and there were no written comments received. Public hearing closed at 7:18 pm M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to recommend approval of the request from River Country Cooperative for a variance from the City’s sign regulations pertaining to maximum canopy and wall sign area for the property located at 4201 Manning Avenue North, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, Vote: 7-0, motion carried Unanimously. Public Hearing – Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review by HC Golf Course LLC HC Golf Course LLC has requested a comprehensive plan amendment to accommodate potential sewer extensions and sewered development within the area bounded by the Old Village to the North, Lake Elmo Ave to the West and 10th Street to the South of Village. Wensman went through some history on the Royal Golf Residential development. Staff was instructed to craft a “Village Transition Area” as opposed to creating a new land use classification and zoning district should the applicants apply for a change to the comprehensive plan. The Council direction that was used as a guide for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is the following: 1) Future development must be via a PUD to ensure adherence to the 1.5 to 2.5 units per acre density range 2) Protection of shoreland district land and/or wetlands within this area of the community should be a principle factor in determining when se wered development will be considered 3) Significant acreage should be required prior to consideration of a sewered development within the new transition area 4) recognize that individual lots and/or neighborhoods (who are not seeking to develop) may also request sewer extensions if/when the extension of sewer service is economically feasible. The land use plan language on “Buffering/Land Use Transitions” would be updated to acknowledge the Village Transition Area and the criteria that must be met prior to sewer being made available for existing properties or environmentally sensitive development. In Criteria A, the City may treat a parcel, or group of parcels as being guided for Village Urban Low Density if at least one of the following criteria is satisfied: 1) The land in question is subject to a failing septic system, and extension of the sanitary sewer system is deemed necessary to protect the health, safety, or welfare of adjacent properties or 2) The parcel or parcels in question have petitioned th e City requesting an extension of municipal services, and the extension project has been approved by the City Council. In Criteria B, the City may treat a parcel of group of parcels as being guided for Village Urban Low Density for the purposes of development if ALL of the following criteria are satisfied: 1) A minimum of 40 contiguous acres is considered for 3 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 development at one time or is planned for a phased development 2) A minimum of one - half of the gross acres proposed for residential development is within a shoreland district 3) All shoreland district requirements for development can be successfully met without variances 4) Development is completed as a PUD that conforms with the allowable density range established for the Village Low Density land use classification 5) The development incurs all costs for the extension of municipal services, the cost for oversizing as may be needed for further extensions into the Village Transition Area, and/or for upgrades to the existing municipal system as may be nee ded to service the proposed development. Griffin asked which parcels between 20th and 30th along Lake Elmo Avenue are in the Shoreland district. Wensman pointed out the parcels that are in Shoreland. Kreimer wanted clarification on if we would get credit for sewered development or if this would be a bonus. Wensman stated that it would depend on the Met Council. Dodson is wondering about criteria B. It appears that it only applies to one property. How is this different than spot zoning? According to the City Attorney, it is not spot zoning because there are properties that could combine and apply for a similar application. Williams is wondering what the total area of the Royal Golf is and how much area is in the shoreland district. Wensman stated that the total area for Royal Golf including the golf course and residential is 477 acres. He does not have the number in the shoreland. Larson is wondering if the other considerations are things like the Hamlet on Sunfish. Wensman stated that the transitional area gives more flexibility for emergency situations like Hamlet on Sunfish. Larson is wondering if this is the way things have to be done, or are we making things more difficult. Wensman stated th at they are trying to find a solution without creating a new land use category. They feel that this is the best path to allow the developer to do what they want to do, while considering the surrounding properties. Clark Schroeder, HC Development, they are asking for this Comprehensive Plan amendment also to address the environmental issues. Not to have individual septic on these lots would be in the best interest for water quality. They have reduced the density from original density of 360 units to 292 units based on feedback from the City. They feel that this is as low as they can go for this project to go forward. Rick Packer, HC Development, says he doesn’t think there is a lot for him to add. They have tried to work with the City to come up with a solution for this property that doesn’t reinvent the wheel with a new zoning category. With the cost of hooking up to sewer, it probably isn’t feasible for a piece of property under 40 acres to hook up. They understand the residents desire to keep this more at the OP density of 100 units, but it 4 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 just isn’t feasible with the sewer component and they are not willing to put the golf course into a permanent conservation easement. There was a letter sent out with 25 findings of fact that he feels is not accurate, especially in regards to shoreland, MPCA, etc. He would be happy to go through those if they are interested. Packer stated that the total site is 477 acres, 50 of which are in West Lakeland Township and are not part of proposal. The gross acres of this property is right around 420 acres. The residential portion is right around 220 acres. Dodson asked what the current state of the project is. Schroeder stated that the golf course is close to being finished. They are currently planting grass on it. They are hoping to have 9 holes open in the middle of the summer and the other 9 by the end of the summer. They have done the MPCA remediation of the golf course. They have taken out a demolition permit and cleaned out the clubhouse. They a re waiting to make sure the City is interested in moving this project forward, so they are at a standstill now. If the City feels this project should not move forward, they would put the property up for sale and market it to sell to the highest bidder. He hopes that doesn’t happen as he feels this is a huge benefit to the area. Packer stated that they have the preliminary plat ready, but have not officially submitted it, but the staff is looking at it for fatal flaws. Public hearing opened at 7:53 pm Shelli Wilk, 11253 14th Street, lives in the Homestead development and is in what she considers a rural pocket. She feels that some of the areas along 94 and the Village were developed more densely so that other areas could remain more rural. She feels that the rural areas are protected by the Citys current zoning. She is concerned that changing this area to sewer is a slippery slope. Shelli submitted a petition signed by 140 people asking that the area in question not be changed to Village Area Transitional, and that Royal Golf have a unique zoning designation. Tim Mandel, 2479 Lisbon Ave, he is upset that the City would consider doing this. There are over 250 homes in this area. When people are moving in and call the City and ask about sewer for this area, they are told that there is no sewer planned for this area. He feels that the Royal Golf has enough property that they could do a community septic system on the site and avoid the city sewer altogether. He went through how many people could live in the area based on this density, especially if the golf course failed. It would be somewhere around 4600 people. Vicki Bailey, 11326 14th Street, has lived in the Homestead for over 18 years. She is wondering why we are here and why we are talking about this when we fought with the Met Council for years to have low density and we have a comprehensive plan in place. It should not be the goal of the staff to allow developers to do what they w ant to do, but to look out for the needs and desires of the residents equally. 5 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 Jean Durand, 11332 20th Street, she owns the property across the street from the golf course. She has lived there 68 years. She feels the number of homes they want to put in is way too many. She doesn’t feel that sewer needs to be put in for this golf course. There were written comments from Ann Bucheck, 2301 Legion Ave, she is opposed to the Comprehensive Plan change and feels that OP standards would be appropriate and can be done under the current Comprehensive Plan . Ms. Bucheck’s letter is included at end of minutes. Nick Miller, 7730 50th Street, believes that the golf course would put the City on the map and would attract people and bring in a lot big names to the area. Wensman stated that in regards to bringing sewer to Tartan Park, the developer would pay for the whole cost of bringing it there. Public hearing closed at 8:12 pm Williams would like to address the findings that he submitted. He submitted them before he saw the actual application and some of them may need to be amended to address the exact amendment. His conclusion is that this piece of property can be developed under OP standards. It is false that the Royal Golf property cannot be developed without sewer. It can be developed with an HOA owned community septic system. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment would still be needed for OP, but that is what he favors. Larson feels that this golf course is an incredible opportunity for the City. This would save all of the major features of this property. Another project could add even more homes. Dodson is concerned that if this project doesn’t go in, the Prairie Island community might be interested. A resident stated that he has had conversations with Blake Johnson, the community relations person for Prairie Island. Mr. Johnson stated that the tribal council of Prairie Island has no further interest in purchasing the Tartan Park property. Dunn stated that Tartan Park is a gem for Lake Elmo and she supports a quality development there. She is not excited about the Village Transition zoning. She would like to see a zoning classification that takes into account that this is commercial and residential both. What can we do as a City to address the buffering around the established homes and be respectful of the residents that are already there? M/S/F: Dodson/Larson, move to add #6 to criteria B to say that if MUSA areas need to be expanded, that it doesn’t impact the averages elsewhere in the City and that Met 6 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 Council approval is given so that it will not impact other portions of the City, Vote:1-6, motion failed. Williams is not in favor of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment, so he is opposed to any changes to it. He would urge the Commissioners to vote against the motion. Williams goes back to the fact that it is false that sewer is required to develop this property. He feels the whole exercise of looking at this amendment is moot and they should be working on what amendment they do want. He would like to see the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that the Comprehensive Plan be amended to include the Royal Golf property in the Rural Area of Lake Elmo which would allow OP development and a golf course based on the findings. Wensman stated that he would recommend a condition of approval that the expansion of the MUSA not impact the averages rather than to add it to the criteria as that is ultimately determined by the Met Council. The city is the one that makes the determination if sewer is available or not. Wensman stated that the golf course will continue to be zoned as public facility with an accessory commercial component. M/S/F: Williams/Griffin, move to recommend that the Comprehensive Plan be amended to include the Royal Golf property in the Rural Development area of Lake Elmo , which would allow OP development and a golf course, Vote: 3-4, motion fails. Williams stated that finding number 15 needs to be changed as it was now determined that only the land located in the Shoreland area is subject to the shoreland regulations, but the whole property would be subject to a PUD. Number 17, Williams would like to add that the OP ordinance requires that 50% of the buildable area be preserved as Open Space. Williams put on the overhead a map of how many golf courses are within 10 miles of City Hall. Larson feels that the City does not offer any services and that we go outside the City for almost all of our services. He would like to see the City start contributing to the larger community. Haggard believes in drawing in quality development to Lake Elmo. She feels that this project would be a huge draw for Lake Elmo. Haggard wanted to hear from the developer about how this proposed change would affect the development. Rick Packer, HC Golf stated that they are unwilling to go down in number of residential units. If they proceed with OP, this project will not move forward. Williams stated that according to MN rule 6120, if a residential PUD goes into a Shoreland district, 50% of the area must be set aside as open space. The City has no discretion in that. Packer disagrees with that interpretation and has emails from the DNR as late as today that what they are proposing is below the minimum threshold of the Shoreland district and the 50% open space does not apply. Packer pointed out that if Mr. Williams is correct, whatever they do tonight won’t matter as they would be denied at the DNR submission 7 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 level. Wensman stated that this is a finding of fact and not necessarily relevant at this time to the Comprehensive Plan amendment at this time. Dodson, Larson and Kreimer all feel that the Tartan Park Golf Course would be a huge benefit to the community. Williams loves the rural character of Lake Elmo and feels that the boundary of 10th Street for the MUSA is very important. He would be sad to lose the golf course, but feels it would be worse to move the sewer to the north of 10 th Street. He feels that Lake Elmo is already on the map and are known for many things such as the regional park, Lake Elmo Inn, Sunfish Lake Park, etc. Lundquist is in favor of this development. She recalls that about 33% or this development is in Shoreland. She thinks it would be foolish not to put sewer in. Griffin would like to see the golf course go into a conservation easement. She is not comfortable that they won’t want to put houses there someday. She is not opposed to the sewer, but not if the golf course is not in open space. M/S/F: Williams/Lundquist, move to postpone consideration of this matter until they have received clarification from the City Attorney about the question of a base density of the residential area such that they would not need to set aside 50% of the area for open space, Vote: 3-4, motion fails. Wensman is not sure how that would affect one land use designation or another. Either their proposal will meet the Shoreland densities or it will not and will be rejected. Williams feels that it is an important question because it would address the total number of units for this area. If they do not have to set aside 50%, that would make a huge difference for the development in terms of numbers and how they feel about the development. Lundquist asked if they reguide this property, what happens to the golf course that is zoned PF. Wensman stated it would stay PF. This is technically not reguiding, but saying if these conditions are met, they can develop at the urban low density zoning. Larson is wondering if there is anything with the PUD bonus densities that could be used to come up with a compromise. Griffin is wondering if this amendment goes with this plan or if it goes with the land. Wensman stated that this amendment includes the whole area between the Village and the Southern section of the Royal Golf. If they vote for this and the Royal Golf proposal doesn’t go through, this whole area will be reguided to Village Transitional. Dunn is wondering why the Village Transition has to be the whole area that is shown on the map in the packet. Couldn’t it be a smaller area? Wensman stated that the genesis of this is tying the Tartan Park area to the Village Area, or this doesn’t make much sense. 8 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 M/S/: Kreimer/Dodson, move to recommend approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment to be determined after this vote to create a Village Transitional area that utilizes the Village Urban Low Density land use designation, No Vote Taken as motion to substitute a motion passed. Williams is opposed to the motion. He loves golf, but the golf course is not worth the risk of this whole area being sewered, which is what could happen. Dunn is concerned that the golf course is not being put into an easement. Wensman stated that the applicant is not willing to put the golf course into a permanent easement. The other open space in relation to the residential portion would be in an HOA controlled easement. Wensman stated that the golf course would have to go through a formal rezone process as it would still be public facility. Packer stated that they will be putting infrastructure in the golf course area and the HOA will own areas in the golf course area. It would be very difficult for someone else to come in and redevelop it. Shelli Wilk, 11253 14th Street, is wondering why it wouldn’t be easier just to rezone the property owned by Royal Golf and create like a golf course community zone. It would appease some of the concerns of the neighbors and not open up such a large area fo r sewered development. Williams thinks this might be a unique solution for a unique situation. M/S/P: Williams/Dunn, move to consider a substitute motion to say that the Planning Commission recommends that the City take the time to look for a unique solution to this unique situation, Vote: 5-2, motion carried. M/S/P: Williams/Lundquist, move to postpone consideration of the substitute motion until at least the next Planning Commission meeting to ask the staff to propose a reguidance to the Comprehensive Plan of a Golf Community category and follow up of a new zoning district, Vote: 5-2, motion carried. Williams doesn’t want to be more specific than that and wants to take the time to think about it. He wants to come up with a solution that might work for the development, but does not put the rest of the City at risk for additional sewer extensions. Larson likes the idea of the golf community zone and a good starting point. Williams would like a unique solution, like a golf community, because no other property to the North of them could meet the criteria. He does not want to see the area north of 20th Street to be subject to sewer. M/S/P: Williams/Lundquist, move to postpone consideration of the substitute motion until at least the next Planning Commission meeting to ask the staff to propose a 9 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 reguidance to the Comprehensive Plan of a Golf Community category and follow up of a new zoning district, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Williams thinks they could use the Cimarron Park Golf Course as a possible minimum for the Criteria. It is approximately 60-70 acres. Lundquist would like a condition on the Golf Course that it stays in open space. She would like to see the development be sewered to protect the area. Williams stated that this needs to be crafted with criteria that is specific to this property so that the criteria can’t be met elsewhere. Williams suggested possibly 30% minimum Shoreland. Dodson asked if they would be excluding Terry Emerson’s property. Wensman stated that there have been conversations that the Emerson property might be part of the preliminary plat of Royal Golf to be developed later. Emerson’s property is about 20 acres. Wensman stated that he doesn’t see the connection between the Shoreland and the Golf Course Community. Kreimer suggested that a criteria could be that sewer is allowed on a golf course greater than 60 acres and residential greater than 60 acres. Williams stated it must be a PUD. Dodson suggested that the criteria on page III-14 might be a good starting point. They would want to change the minimum acreage to 120 acres, minimum 60 for golf course and minimum 60 acres for residential. Must be a PUD with 1 ½ - 2 ½ units per acre. Wensman stated that they have probably put together enough for the guidance, but will get to more of the details when they work on the zoning. Dunn asked about buffering. Wensman stated that it would be written into the zoning district. Public Hearing – Zoning Text Amendment – Non-Conforming Use Ordinance Wensman started his presentation by stating that the Citys code pertaining to nonconformities is not compliant with changes in the state statute. The section affected pertains to the preservation of non-conforming uses. The non-conforming use may be continued “through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenan ce, or improvement.” “The continuation of the non-conforming used does not include expansion except as otherwise permitted by this section.” The amendment specifies when you can restore or replace a non-conforming structure. Public Hearing opened at 10:33 pm There were no other written or electronic comments received Public Hearing closed at 10:33 pm 10 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 M/S/P: Williams/Griffin, move to recommend approval of the ordinance amending the Lake Elmo Code of ordinances regarding non-conforming uses, buildings and structures, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing – Zoning Text Amendment – Variance Ordinance Amendment Wensman started his presentation by stating that the City Attorney suggested the City amend the expiration section of the Variance Ordinance, Section 154.109 because it is of questionable legality because variances run with the land. The change deals with the expiration of the variance if it is not used by the applicant. Public Hearing opened at 10:36 pm No written or electronic comments were received. Public Hearing closed at 10:36 pm M/S/P: Dunn/Lundquist, move to recommend approval of ordinance 08-_ amending the Lake Elmo code of ordinances, Section 154.109 as it pertains to expirations of variances, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. City Council Updates – October 18, 2016 Meeting i) Inwood 4th Addition Final Plat – passed ii) Conditional Use Permit – 5699 Keats Ave – passed iii) Conditional Use Permit – Rock Point Church - passed Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. November 14, 2016 b. November 28, 2016 Staff has received updates from the DNR. They stated that we were not using the current template. The City tweaked what we had previously submitted and resubmitted for review. Commission Concerns Lundquist was uncomfortable with the resident who spoke that was making negative comments about Mr. Wensman. She doesn’t want the Commission meetings to become like Council meetings. If that type of thing happens again, she expects people to be respectful and there should be a stop put to it. Meeting adjourned at 10:49 pm 11 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-24-16 Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertman Planning Program Assistant