HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Packet; 07-10-17
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 10, 2017 at 7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Approve Agenda
3. Approve Minutes
a. June 12, 2017
4. Public Hearings
a. None
5. Business Items
a. EASTON VILLAGE 3RD ADDITION FINAL PLAT. Chase Development is
requesting final plat approval for the 3rd addition of Easton Village. This addition
will include 28 single family lots that are located on 8.53 acres.
6. Updates
a. City Council Updates – 6/20/17 Meeting
i. 9359 Jane Road – Shoreland Variance – passed
ii. Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat & PUD –
passed
iii. Fence Ordinance – passed
iv. Inwood 5th addition developer agreement amendment – passed
b. City Council Updates – 7/5/17 Meeting
i. Royal Golf Zoning Map Amendment – passed
ii. Southwind Easement Vacation - passed
iii. Southwind Final Plat - passed
iv. Southwind Developer Agreement - passed
v. Hidden Meadows 2nd Addition Final Plat – passed
Staff Updates
vi. Upcoming Meetings:
July 24, 2017
August 14, 2017
vii. MAC CEP Report-none
c. Commission Concerns
7. Adjourn
***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; 6-12-17
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of June 12, 2017
Chairman Kreimer called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at
7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dorschner (arrived at 8:00), Kreimer, Dodson, Emerson,
and Hartley
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Williams, Larson & Lundquist
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Wensman & City Planner Becker
Approve Agenda:
M/S/P: Hartley/Dodson, move to approve the agenda as presented, Vote: 4-0, motion
carried unanimously.
Approve Minutes: May 22, 2017
M/S/P: Hartley/Emerson, move to approve the May 22, 2017 minutes as presented,
Vote: 4-0, motion carried unanimously.
Public Hearing – PUD Preliminary & Final Plat & Plans – Lakewood Crossing
Becker started her presentation regarding a PUD Preliminary and Final Plat to subdivide
a 3.82 acre parcel into 3 commercial lots in a Planned Unit Development. Staff has
identified 2 PUD objectives that are met, allowing this to be a PUD project. There are a
number of items requested for PUD flexibility. These include flexibility for types of
allowed uses, minimum lot width, impervious surface, parking lot setbacks, signage, etc.
There are a number of uses that are conditional uses that the applicant would like to be
permitted uses. The applicant feels that conditions can be addressed through the PUD
process. There are a number of Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards that ar e not
met. These include building orientation, landscaping, sidewalks, streetscape lighting,
and parking.
There are some engineering comments including a request for a phasing plan for
construction plans, a right turn lane, drainage & utility easements , MN Dot drainage
permit, and the second access eliminated. There are 20 conditions of approval and 11
findings of fact.
2
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
Dodson asked about the traffic issue and flow with the Kwik Trip. Becker stated that
one suggestion was to put a stop sign in to regulate the flow. It is addressed in
condition #20. Kreimer asked if the island in the drive lane should be removed. Becker
stated that the Building Official and Fire Chief brought that up as a concern, but they
have no suggestions about it.
There was a discussion about medical facilities and if it should be made an allowed use
for this site. Hartley is not in favor of using the broader definition of medical facilities
for this site.
Dodson is wondering if there would be a problem if the driving lanes by the drive
through be one-way.
Hartley asked if the outdoor dining area has been identified. Becker pointed out where
that would be in 2 areas. Hartley is wondering if there is any fencing or any other type
of delineation. Becker stated that it is in the design manual but not the zoning code.
Bruce Miller, MFC Properties, stated that there was a firm hired to do a drive through
analysis. As a result of that analysis, one of the drive throughs has been eliminated.
They are trying to work something out with the Ebertz family for a second access, but
the Ebertz family is not sure what they are going to do with their property, so they are
reluctant to commit to anything. The City has directed that the sewer and water needs
to be extended to the Ebertz property. Miller stated that will probably be done with a
later phase and they will be working with the Ebertz family on that. Miller has reviewed
the 20 conditions of approval and is confident that they can meet all of the conditions
when they bring in the final plans for building permits and final plat. Miller stated as far
as the medical facilities, they are talking only about clinics and he would be comfortable
if the condition was changed to state that.
Kreimer asked about the City of Lake Elmo theming. Miller stated that he has looked at
the theming and they plan to have ornamental trash receptacles, benches, decorative
lighting and wrought iron fencing. They plan to work with staff to fine tune that.
Public Hearing opened at 7:50 pm
No one spoke and there was no written correspondence.
Public Hearing closed at 7:50 pm
M/S/P: Dodson/Hartley, move to add a finding #12 that a benefit to the City is the
developer running sewer & water to the western edge of the property in accordance to
PUD benefits, Vote: 4-0, motion carried unanimously.
3
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
M/S/P: Kreimer/Hartley, move to add condition #21 that permitted medical facilities
shall be limited to non-urgent facilities such as clinics, eye doctors and dental clinics,
Vote: 4-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Kreimer/Dodson, move to add condition #22 that the applicant shall provide site
amenities such as benches, trash receptacles, decorative lighting and that the signage
will follow the theming, Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Hartley/Kreimer, move to add condition #23 that fencing is required around all
outdoor dining areas, Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Kreimer/Hartley, move to amend condition #9 to read “the applicant shall
amend the proposed Landscape Plan to comply with City standards and obtain approval
by the City and include addition of landscaping along freeway frontage”, Vote: 3-2,
motion carried.
Dodson is fine with the larger signs on the building and the ground sign as long as they
follow the Lake Elmo theming.
M/S/P: Kreimer/Dodson, move to recommend approval of Lakewood Crossing 2nd
addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans with the 23 conditions of approval as
drafted by staff and amended findings of fact listed in the staff report , Vote: 5-0, motion
carried unanimously.
Public Hearing – Shoreland Variance
Becker started her presentation regarding the variance request for 9359 Jane Road from
expansion of a non-conforming structure that does not meet setback requirements from
the OHWL or impervious surface requirements. Becker went through the past variance
requests and DNR permit violations. The applicant is proposing a home addition that
will replace an existing deck previously allowed by variance. The proposed addition is
45.4 feet from OHWL where 100 is required. This puts it in a shoreland impact zone.
The city received MNDNR review on 6/9/17 with recommended denial based on the
impervious surface increase and that the addition is in the shoreland impact Zone. They
have stated that if the variance is granted, mitigation conditions are recommended.
Staff would recommend adding a condition of approval that the applicant direct rain
gutter discharge to a rain garden designed by a professional engineer or landscape
architect and installed under their direction.
Becker went through the recommended findings of practical difficulties, unique
circumstances, character of locality and adjacent properties and traffic. There are 2
staff recommended conditions of approval 1) the applicant secure any required permits
and plan approvals from the City and other applicable jurisdictions 2) the applicant shall
4
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
direct rain gutter discharges into a rain garden designed by a professional engineer or
landscape architect and installed under their direction.
Dorschner asked if the homeowner is going to put another deck on. Becker stated that
they are not proposing that and if they did, it would require a variance.
Hartley asked about the practical difficulties. Becker stated that the lot was platted
before shoreland standards. Because of the shape of the lot, there is not a lot of space
for a home. The lot is much longer than it is wide. The footprint is not expanded by
much.
Scott Drommerhausen, 9359 Jane Road N, stated he has been working with Stephen &
Emily for a little over a year. There are currently gutters on all sides of the home. There
are no plans for an additional deck.
Dodson is wondering if there is enough land there for the rain garden and another
drainfield if it should fail. Drommerhousen thinks there is an area that is more than
adequate for the rain garden.
Public Hearing opened at 8:31 pm
No one spoke and there was no written correspondence
Public Hearing closed at 8:31 pm
Hartley thinks they need to address the restoration of shoreland vegetation which was
part of the DNR recommendation. This lot has almost double the impervious that is
normally allowed. He would like to see restoration of 75% of the shore line. Mr.
Drommerhausen described what the current shore line is like. There is a small beach
area about 20 feet and then there are some rocks.
M/S/F: Hartley/Kreimer, move to recommend putting natural vegetation in for
approximately 75% of the shoreland, Vote: 1-4, motion fails.
Dodson is concerned about making the homeowner do something that is more of a
good practice that the Lake Association is already addressing.
M/S/P: Dodson/Dorschner, move to add that the location of the backup drainfield area
be identified, no trees or vegetation be planted that could potentially interfere with a
future drainfield, and that it not interfere with the infiltration basin, Vote: 5-0, motion
carried unanimously.
5
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
M/S/P: Dorschner/Dodson, move to add to condition #2 that the raingarden or
remediation plan address the additional runoff of the whole addition, Vote: 5-0, motion
carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dodson/Dorschner, move to recommend approval of the request for shoreland
variances to allow expansion of a non-conforming structure that does not meet setback
requirements from the Ordinary High Water Level and maximum impervious surface
standards, subject to conditions of approval as recommended by staff and amended by
Planning Commission, Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
Public Hearing – Fence Ordinance
Becker started her presentation regarding 154.205 fencing regulations. The City’s
Zoning Code prohibits solid wall fences over four feet in height on lots under ½ acre in
size. This is being brought up again as there was a solid wall fence that was erroneously
permitted on a lot under half acre in size. There is another neighbor that wants a similar
solid wall fence to enclose a swimming pool. From a planning perspective, when lot size
decreases, so does privacy. Staff is also recommending clarifying language that when a
fence is installed on the property line that the stakes be visible for inspection. This will
make it easier for staff to determine if the fence was installed in the appropriate
location. Staff is also suggesting adding language that when a fence is in a front or side
corner yard, that any required setback from a public right-of-way be added. This would
be for public safety.
Public Hearing opened at 8:53 pm
No one spoke and there was no written correspondence
Public Hearing closed at 8:53 pm
Kreimer is in favor of the amendments to location for maintenance, but feels they have
looked at this ordinance closely over the years and is not in favor of the other changes.
Emerson and Dorschner are in favor of the privacy fences on smaller lots. Dorschner
thinks that allowing a portion to be solid wall and having a step down makes the fence
look awkward.
M/S/P: Kreimer/Hartley, move to accept the changes to section #5 location as provided
by staff, Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/F: Kreimer/Hartley, move to accept the changes to the fencing ordinance as
described in section 5, but not the changes in the other sections, Vote: 2-3, motion
failed.
6
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
M/S/P: Dorschner/Dodson, move to recommend adoption of amendments to Section E
of the Fencing Regulations of the City’s Zoning Code as presented by staff, Vote: 3-2,
motion carried.
Business Item – Hidden Meadows 2nd Addition Final Plat - OP
Wensman started his presentation regarding final plat approval of Hidden Meadows 2nd
addition for a 26 unit single family residential OP development located off of Keats Ave
and Hwy 36. Wensman went through the history of this site and when the approvals
and extensions happened. Wensman pointed out that because it has been longer than
one year since this has been platted, the City can enforce the current regulations and
standards including the Engineering design standards.
Wensman went through what is included in Hidden Meadows 2nd addition. It is a little
confusing because a part of the current outlot B is part of the residential development
area, which also includes the original farm home as a lot. The OP development area is
68.05 acres. The density is .41 du/buildable acres. There is currently 51% of buildable
open space. The required buffers go all the way to the back of the house in most
instances. The developer has come forward with a plan that has a reduction of the
buffers in exchange for screening or some other buffer. The Ziertmans on the west side
do not object to the reduced buffer provided that a berm is provided in conjunction
with the coniferous screening. The Bergmanns have not commented on the buffer, but
have asked for a street stub connection to their property to the East.
Another issue is the Cul-de-sac length. The City’s standard for cul-de-sac length for
subdivisions with lots 2.5 acres or less in size is 1000 feet. The cul-de-sac length for 59th
Street was 2,000 feet long for access to Rockpoint church, and is now being extended to
4,000 feet long. The cul-de-sac length for 57th Place N is nearly 1,000 feet long. Right of
ways are typically 60 foot wide to accommodate for trails, utilities, etc. This project has
a 50 foot right of way which includes a 24 foot wide street, surmountable curbs, street
trees, trail and sanitary sewer. With this being a 24 foot wide street, parking will be
restricted to one side of the street.
The City Engineer is starting a Highway 36 frontage road study to coincide with MNDot’s
long range plans to limit access to State Highway 36. A future frontage road may need
to go through outlot A and connect to 59 th Street. There are a number of engineering
deviations associated with this plat. There is encroachment into wetlands, wetland
buffers and other water bodies. The storm ponds do not meet City Design standards.
There are retaining walls in the right of way and right of way does not match the typical
City design.
The community septic on Outlot B was installed by Rockpoint Church and has excess
capacity to accommodate 17 new homes. Lot 1 block 1 was not proposed to be
connected to the community septic, but staff recommends that it should be.
7
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
The landscape plan needs some updating to include water and sanitary sewer
connection, 88 tress, changing the mix of buffer trees in buffer to evergreens, Bergmann
screening, berm along west property line with the proposed tress along Ziertman
property in lieu of reduced buffer.
There are no off-site street connections. The Bergmann’s are requesting a street stub.
The Slomkowski property is landlocked except for a private driveway easement. There
are street lights in the plan shown at intersections and cul-de-sacs. The draft findings
basically touch on the deviations from the current standards. Staff would like the
Planning Commission to specifically address the reduced buffers and the open space
that not less than 60% be in contiguous parcels of not less than 10 acres.
Dodson asked about lots 9 & 10 that have a pond and wetland that goes through the
property. Dodson stated that it doesn’t look like they can get to the back of their
property. Wensman stated that is correct. Dodson asked if that meets City Standards
and if it isn’t can we ask for that to be changed. Wensman stated that it doesn’t meet
current standards. The pond is already there and the site is already graded and it would
be a hardship for the developer if modification is required, the development might not
happen.
Dodson asked about the wastewater facility and if an analysis of the upgrade has been
done. Wensman stated that the City has not reviewed any design and that is why it is a
condition of approval.
Kreimer asked about providing access to Bergmann’s and to the property to the South.
Wensman stated that Bergmanns have asked for access, but the property to the South
has not.
Dorschner asked what the legal responsibility of the City is after 10 years. He feels a lot
of things have changed over time. Wensman stated that the City is under no obligation
because of the length of time that has passed.
Emerson stated that the cul-de-sac should extend to the Bergmanns and they can
probably still get the same amount of lots. If Bergmanns are looking to have the road
extended, they probably plan to develop and would not be concerned with the reduced
buffer. He also feels that it would be wise to get an easement or something to the
south.
Mark Guenther, RM Investments, stated that they have been trying to work through the
issues for the last year and he thinks that they have gotten there. Guenther stated that
when they went for an extension, they were asked to keep the plat as designed and
preliminary platted. Guenther stated that they are requesting that Lot 1 Block 1 not be
part of the community drainfield. The ownership will be retained by the Rockpoint
8
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
Church and the future of those parcels are unknown. Guenther talked about the
community system and what would need to be done to add the 7 additional homes.
The dump site has been cleaned up. He is asking for the language of condition 10 be
changed from 26 lots to 25 to remove Lot 1 Block 1. Guenther stated that the plan is
consistent with Preliminary Plat. The buffer areas are difficult because they wouldn’t
even be able to construct a deck or a porch on these houses. The site has already been
graded and through the watershed. The quantity of the discharge of the water cannot
increase. On the West side, there are some low areas where the water discharges to.
They are not changing where the water is leaving the property, but they are controlling
the rate that will be discharged. Guenther explained the grade changes and landscapin g
along the property lines. As far as berming, Guenther stated that they can take a look at
that, but with the low area, it might be hard, but if they are generating some dirt, they
will attempt to do that. Guenther has concerns about providing access to the Bergmann
parcel because it would affect the watershed and they would probably lose a lot.
Dorschner asked if the roads were graded already. Guenther stated that they are
subgraded. There would just be a few adjustments to be made and vegetation th at
would need to be removed. Dorschner is concerned about the ponding on Lots 8, 9 &
10. Emerson is wondering if this was originally a wetland or if it was graded that way.
Guenther stated that he does not know if it was existing or if it was created. Dodson
asked when the grading that is there was done. Guenther stated it was done at
Preliminary Plat 11 years ago.
Dodson asked about the CIC agreement that will be set up with the Church. Guenther
stated that there will be 2 HOA agreements. One will be just for the area of Single
family homes set up to maintain the outlots and the other will be for the septic system.
Guenther stated that the split Church/Homes would be about a 60/40 split for usage.
Dorschner has a lot of concerns about this plat and is wondering if there might be other
options for this site. Guenther stated that there are not a lot of other options for this
site without losing a lot of the natural features and filling in a wetland.
Joan Ziertman, 5761 Keats Ave, overall is in favor of the development. A condition of
approval of the church was to develop a 68 acre OP residential development. The
preliminary plat had the buffer setback at the 200 feet. Reducing the buffer was never
discussed at the public hearings and Ziertman feels that the developer should have
talked to the neighbors before assuming that they could reduce the buffers. It will
require a 4/5 vote of the City Council. The preliminary plat landscape plan already
showed a double tree line, so the City and neighbors are not getting anything in return
for the reduction. Ziertman stated that they farm their property and have animals and
landscaping alone is no guarantee for buffering. Trees can die and not be replaced, or
homeowners can remove them. Ziertman stated that the U of M landscaping berming
standards state that berms provide noise, wind and screening for 2 incompatible uses
which farming against residential is. Ziertman requested that condition #7 be changed
9
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
to have a berm constructed to U of M standards and setback from the property line for
proper drainage. Ziertman showed pictures of the common property line to
demonstrate that it is a flat area.
Dodson stated that he is generally opposed to this development. However, should it go
forward, he has some conditions he would like to propose.
M/S/P: Dodson/Dorschner, move to amend condition #10 to add that funds for this
system will be placed into escrow and the declarant of the CIC will demonstrate a bank
account statement with a capital reserve required for operation of the wastewater
system is either 1/3 the cost or an amount based on an equipment failure model
provided by the vendor operating the wastewater system, whichever is more , Vote: 5-0,
motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dodson/Kreimer, move to strike condition #20 per recommendation of the
Planning Director, Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dodson/Dorschner, move to add condition #20 that the declarant of the CIC will
demonstrate transfer of all permits and titles for the wastewater facility to the common
interest community, Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Dodson, move to remove condition #5, Vote: 5-0, motion carried
unanimously.
Dodson is concerned about how the CIC will work if the Church has 60% of the capacity,
how the voting and decisions will be made surrounding that system. He is more
reassured that it is only pumping grey water as it should have less technical difficulties.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Dodson, move to amend condition #7 to include a berm built to U of
M standards behind lot 1, 2 & 3, behind the Ziertman property, Vote: 5-0, motion
carried unanimously.
Dodson would rather see a loop for roads rather than the 2 cul -de-sacs. Emerson stated
that the problem is it is already graded and there is a wetland there. Dorschner asked
about the width of the roads. Wensman stated that if the roads are wider, the r ight of
way would need to be wider and the plat would not work. Hartley is wondering if the
northern cul-de-sac could just be straightened and brought over to the Bergman n
property. Emerson stated that the road would have to go to the north into the chu rch
property, so there would need to be an agreement with the church and no lots would
be lost.
M/S/F: Dodson/Dorschner, move to recommend denial of Hidden Meadows 2nd addition
due to the number of exceptions in the staff report to normal standards, the land use
10
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
should be rural residential and the number of homes is too small for the community
septic system, the potential land trust, buffer and road issues , Vote: 2-3, motion failed.
Hartley is wondering if it would make sense to put a provision to keep the 20 acres to
the north open for a potential frontage road. Dorschner is concerned about the HOA
partnering with the Church to maintain the Wastewater system. What would happen if
the church goes bankrupt? Guenther stated that this HOA will be set up correctly
financially. The system was designed and built to accommodate the church and the
homes. If the homes are not added, it would be detrimental to the Church.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Emerson, move to add a condition that the developer work with the
Church to obtain an easement to extend the cul-de-sac, 57th Place N, North of Lot 11,
Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
Guenther stated that in speaking with the Church representatives, they would not be
opposed to platting a road easement, but they would not want to build the road at this
time.
M/S/P: Kreimer/Hartley, move to recommend approval of Hidden Meadows 2nd addition
with 21 conditions of approval as amended based on the findings in the staff report ,
Vote: 4-1, motion carried.
Business Item – Southwind Final Plat
Wensman started his presentation regarding a final plat request from Southwind
Builders for a 46 single family attached dwelling development on approximately 15
acres. This development is to the North of Hunter’s Crossing and 5th Street North. This
development will have only the one phase. The final plat is consistent with the
preliminary plat, however, the trail from the cul-de-sac bulb to 5th Street has been
removed. The homes will be sprinklered. There were a number of engineering
comments including infiltration basin comments, stormwater management, ROW, etc.
There is a retaining wall that is right on the North property line and easement and the
stromsewer is close to the back lot line of the homes. There is not an adequate area for
maintenance of the stormsewer pipe, so the engineer is recommending that it be
owned and maintained by the HOA.
Wensman went through the 6 findings and 15 conditions of approval.
Dodson asked about the infiltration pond on outlot A and how the overflow would work.
It seems like with the topography it would go to the street culvert.
Larry Alm, Southwind Builders, does not have a presentation, but is willing to answer
questions from the Commission.
11
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
Kreimer asked Alm why the trail connection was eliminated at the bulb at the end of the
cul-de-sac. Alm stated that he feels there is not room for it and it would not go
anywhere as there is no sidewalk on that side. Kreimer stated that there is a trail on
that side. Kreimer asked about the house designs. The developer showed the house
designs on the overhead. They will all have lower levels with walkouts.
Dodson asked about the 100 year overflow in the basin on outlot A. He is wondering if
that can go West instead of North. Alm stated that it already runs east/west.
Emerson asked about what kind of screening there is next to the commercial property
to the East. Alm stated that the elevation of their property is higher and there are
mature trees there.
M/S/P: Kreimer/Dorschner, move to add condition #16 that a bituminous trail or
sidewalk be constructed from the end of the bulb of the cul-de-sac to the trail on 5th
street, Vote: 4-1, motion carried.
Dodson stated that he is mildly opposed just because it may impact the parking in the
cul-de-sac. Emerson stated that it is kind of nice to have a circle for walking. Wensman
stated that currently the City does not allow parking in cul -de-sacs.
M/S/P: Kreimer/Hartley, move to strike condition #14 as it is not needed, Vote: 5-0,
motion carried unanimously.
Dorschner is wondering how they will build the retaining wall right on the property line.
Emerson asked what the height of the wall is. Wensman stated that it is 4 feet tall. The
developer stated that as the grading is done, the wall will go in. It will all be done from
their side. Dodson is happy that the cul-de-sacs are public reather than private as they
were previously.
M/S/P: Kreimer/Dorschner, move to add condition #16 to revise the landscape plan to
have additional trees for buffering behind lots 26-29 to the extent possible, Vote: 5-0,
motion carried unanimously.
Emerson stated that there is a drainage swale there that makes it very difficult to add
trees.
M/S/P: Dodson/Kreimer, move to recommend approval of the Southwind Final Plat with
the 16 conditions of approval, Vote: 5-0, motion carried unanimously.
City Council Updates – June 6, 2017 Meeting
i) Hammes 1st Addition Drainage and Utility Easement Vacation - passed
ii) Easton Village 2nd Development Agreement - passed
12
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-12-17
iii) Inwood 5th Developers Agreement – passed, but will come back for an
amendment at the next meeting
iv) Royal Golf Course Preliminary Plat & PUD Plans - passed
v) Wildflower PUD Amendment - passed
vi) Parcel A – Schiltgen Property Concept PUD - passed
Staff Updates
1. Upcoming Meetings
a. June 26, 2017
b. July 10, 2017
2. MAC CEP Report
Commission Concerns
Kreimer asked about the Cimarron bankruptcy. Wensman stated that the hedge fund
that owns Cimarron is in bankruptcy in a 2 other states, so it is difficult to get answers
from them.
Meeting adjourned at 11:50 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Joan Ziertman
Planning Program Assistant
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
STAFF REPORT
DATE: 7/10/2017
BUSINESS ITEM
ITEM #: 5A
CASE # 2017-02
MOTION
TO: Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat
FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a Final Plat request from Chase Development
for the 3rd Addition of Easton Village, a planned 217 unit residential development. The 3rd Addition
includes 28 single family lots that are located within an 8.53 acre area to the north of the western
portion of Easton Village 1st Addition. Staff is recommending approval of the request subject to
compliance with the conditions listed in this report.
ISSUE BEFORE COMMISSION:
The Commission is being asked to recommend approval or denial of the Final Plat request for the 3rd
Addition of Easton Village based on its consistency with the approved Preliminary Plat (revised on
6/21/2017).
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
General Information.
Applicant: Chase Development, 2140 West County Road 42, Burnsville, MN
Property Owners: Easton Village, LLC (Tom Wolter) 2140 West County Road 42, Burnsville, MN
Location: Section 12 & 13, Township 29 North, Range 21 West in Lake Elmo, north of
30th Street, west of Manning Avenue, and south of the Union Pacific railroad
right-of-way. PID Number 13.029.21.42.0025.
Request: Application for final plat approval of a 28 unit residential subdivision to be
named Easton Village 3rd Addition.
Zoning: LDR – Limited Density Residential
Surrounding: North – vacant/agricultural land (RT – Rural Transitional); West – single family
home, City park, natural vegetation (PF – Public and Quasi Public Open Space;
South – vacant land (LDR – Limited Density Residential); East – Lake Elmo
Airport (Baytown Township).
Comp. Plan: Village Urban Low Density Residential (1.5 - 2.49 units per acre)
2
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
History: Property was included in Village Planning Area boundary and municipal sewer
service area as defined in the 2013 Village Land Use Plan. Site has historically
been used for faming activities, including the growing of agricultural crops.
Sketch Plan review by Planning Commission on 1/27/14 with Preliminary Plat
approval on July 15, 2014. 1st An AUAR for the Village Planning area was
approved by the City in May of 2009. 1st Addition approval on March 3, 2015,
and 2nd Addition approval on May 2, 2017. Preliminary Plat revised on
6/21/2017.
Action Deadline: Application Complete – 6/21/2017
60 Day Deadline – 8/20/2017
Extension Letter Mailed – No
120 Day Deadline –
Regulations: Chapter 153 – Subdivision Regulations
Article 10 – Urban Residential Districts (LDR)
§150.270 Storm Water, Erosion, and Sediment Control
Consistency with Preliminary Plat.
Revised Preliminary Plat. Prior to the 1st Addition Final Plat approval, the approved Preliminary Plat
was revised in December of 2014 to address the following:
• The need to reconfigure the temporary access into the subdivision.
• Revisions to the grading plan.
• Adjustments to the property boundaries adjacent to the gas line that bisects the site .
• The provision of a slightly larger buffer from the railroad tracks.
• Revisions to the storm water management plan.
With the 2nd Addition, the developer again revised the preliminary plat. A condition of 2nd Addition
approval was that the revised Preliminary Plat and Plans be approved prior to submittal of accepting
the 3rd Addition.
Increased Number of Lots.
• The proposed 3rd Addition Final Plat increased the number of lots from 27 to 28, consistent with
the revised Preliminary Plat.
• # of lots in area proposed as 3rd Addition in approved and revised Preliminary Plat: 27
• # of lots in proposed 3rd Addition Final Plat: 28
Decreased Lot Sizes.
The table below shows the lot sizes in the area proposed as 2nd Addition in the revised Preliminary
Plat as compared to the proposed 2nd Addition Final Plat:
Lot Block December 2014 Preliminary
Plat
Final Plat/Revised Preliminary
Plat
1 1 10,394 11,194
2 1 10,425 11,167
3 1 11,294 10,935
3
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
1 2 12,920 16,641
2 2 12,121 8,140
3 2 8,463 9,405
4 2 8,670 8,522
5 2 8,833 8,555
6 2 8,809 8,483
7 2 8,988 8,836
8 2 9,808 10,237
9 2 12,257 12,143
10 2 --- (not on preliminary plat) 11,958
1 3 12,324 14,294
2 3 11,400 9,217
3 3 8,450 9,231
4 3 8,234 9,124
5 3 8,968 8,450
6 3 9,273 9,100
7 3 9,292 8,724
8 3 9,705 8,138
9 3 9,595 9,777
10 3 11,340 10,307
11 3 11,452 12,769
12 3 18,433 15,491
13 3 14,261 12,330
14 3 11,728 9,519
15 3 11,259 8,650
Outlots. Outlot A, proposed as open space for landscaping, to be owned and maintained by the
Homeowners Association, is 0.111 acres. Outlot B, which is the trail corridor, is 0.091 acres.
Final Area of Dedicated (Non-Arterial) Right-of-Way: 1.684 acres
Outlot F Replatted. The Applicant has replatted Outlot F in to separate outlots. The outlots indicate
phasing for the rest of the development. Outlots I and J will be dedicated to the City with the 3rd
Addition, for stormwater management purposes and parkland. The dedication of part of these outlots
as parkland will satisfy the remaining parkland dedication requirements for the entire development.
4
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
Engineering Comments. The City Engineer has reviewed the Final Plat, and these comments can be
reviewed in the attached Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat Engineering comments review memo
dated May 25, 2017. Outlined comments include the following:
Payment for pipe over-sizing from the City standard 8-inch pipe should be addressed as part
of the developer agreement.
There are a number of comments outlined in the Construction Plans and Specifications memo
provided by the City Engineer that must be addressed and approved prior to recording of the
Final Plat.
Easement Vacation. 3rd Addition plats a portion of Outlot F of Easton Village 2nd Addition. This
Outlot has three easements recorded against it, a permanent easement for drainage and utility
purposes, and a temporary access easement which terminates upon replatting of Outlot F and a
temporary construction easement which terminates after a one year warranty period after completion
of installing the public and utility and drainageway. None of these should cause an issue for platting.
Temporary Cul-de-Sac and Road Connection. The Applicant has proposed a temporary cul-de-sac
off of Lilac Avenue North and a temporary road connection connecting Village Parkway to 33rd
Street North. Temporary Road Easements will need to be provided.
“Eyebrows” Removed. The original Preliminary Plat was shown with 33rd Street North as having
‘eyebrows’ as it moves north-south. The Applicant has removed these, in order to (as communicated
to Staff during conversations with the Developer) provide a better design and decrease the amount of
maintenance. The updated Preliminary Plat reflects this change, and the Final Plat is consistent with
the revised Preliminary Plat. Staff has reviewed this change and has not seen an issue in this.
Outlot Added. An additional outlot was added, consistent with the revised Preliminary Plat. The
Applicant has communicated that this is proposed as open space to be used for plantings. Staff does
not see an issue with the addition of this outlot as long as the maintenance and responsibility for this
outlot is clearly outlined in the Landscape License Agreement as the responsibility of the
Homeowners’ Association.
Parkland.
• The approved Preliminary Plat shows a trail connection between Lot 29 of Block 8 (shown on
the Final Plat as Lot 14 Block 3) and Lot 1 of Block 10 (shown on the Final Plat as Lot 13 of
Block 3). This trail outlot is 0.091 acres.
• The proposed Final Plat shows this trail connection moved to be above Lot 15 Block 3.
• Staff does not see an issue with this adjustment as the trail connection in Preliminary Plans does
not directly connect to a trail across Village Parkway.
• This trail is proposed to go through a Drainage and Utility easement and has been reviewed by
the Engineer.
• The approved Developer Agreement for Easton Village 1st Addition states that the developer
shall be required to dedicate 9.84 acres of land for public park purposes for the entire
subdivision. The 1st Addition dedicated 3.99 acres of parkland, and future project phases are to
either dedicate the remaining 5.85 acres of park land or cash payment in lieu of dedication. The
Easton Village 2nd Addition Developer Agreement required a security in the form of a Letter of
Credit in the amount of the fee in lieu of park dedication for the acreage of that addition. This
Letter of Credit will be released with the dedication of the 3rd Addition, as (as previously
mentioned), Outlot F has been replatted in to a number of different outlots, and Outlots I and J
will be dedicated to the City. The developer will receive parkland dedication for parts of these
outlots, and so the parkland dedication requirement for the entire development will be satisfied.
5
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
Landscape Plans.
The Applicant submitted updated Preliminary Landscape Plans with application for 1st
Addition Final Plat, dated 12/17/2014 in response to comments provided by the City’s
Landscape Architect in a review letter dated 12/3/2014.
The 3rd Addition Final Plat Landscape Plans are generally consistent with the Preliminary
Landscape Plans in the following ways:
o Autumn Blaze Maple are proposed where Common Hackberry was approved
surrounding the trail.
o Red Maple is proposed on the left side of Lilac Avenue North where Autumn Blaze
Maple was approved.
o Accolade Elm, Hackberry and White Oak are proposed where Redmond Linden and
Red Maple were approved on 33rd Street N.
The Landscape Plan does not include utility locations. The Plans will need to be updated to
include this.
Street Naming. There are no other streets in the City with the name Lilac Avenue, and so this street
name is consistent with the City’s Street Naming Policy. There is, however, another 33 rd Street
North within the City. While this name is not consistent with the City’s Street Naming Policy in t hat
the Policy states that unless a newly proposed street directly extends from an existing street, no
street name that already exists in the city or its environs shall be used, regardless if it is on the same
grid as another street. However, it should be noted that the street directly to the south of the street
that is proposed to be named 33rd Street North has already been platted and named as 32nd Street
North. There also exist other streets within the City that are also named 32nd Street North outside of
this development. Because of this, it may make sense to allow the proposed name for this street.
Final Plat Approval Process. The City’s subdivision ordinance establishes the procedure for
obtaining final subdivision approval, in which case a final plat may only be reviewed after the City
takes action on a preliminary plat. As long as the final plat is consistent with the preliminary
approval, it must be approved by the City. Please note that the City’s approval of the Easton Village
Preliminary Plat did include a series of conditions that must be met by the applicant, which are
addressed in the “Review and Analysis” section below. There are no public hearing requirements
for a final plat.
In order to provide the Planning Commission with an update concerning the conditions associated
with the preliminary plat for Easton Village, Staff has prepared the following:
Preliminary Plat Conditions – With Staff Update Comments (updated information in bold
italics):
1) Within six months of preliminary plat approval, the applicant shall complete the following: a) the
applicant shall provide adequate title evidence satisfactory to the City Attorney; and b) the
applicant shall pay all fees associated with the preliminary plat. The above conditions shall be
met prior to the City accepting an application for final plat and prior to the commencement of any
grading activity on the site. Comments: a) all title work will need to be submitted and reviewed
by the City Attorney before City officials sign the final plat; b) the applicant has submitted an
escrow payment with Final Plat application that is being used to cover Staff and consultant
expenses related to the City’s review.
6
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
2) The grading plan shall be updated to include the protective tree fencing necessary to pre serve all
vegetative areas identified for protection around the 5.15 acre residential parcel to the west of the
subdivision. Comments: The grading plan was updated accordingly. All disturbed areas are
shown on the plan, and the applicant will need to replace disturbed trees in accordance with
the City’s tree replacement schedule. There is no tree protection or removal in the 3rd Addition.
3) The applicant shall work with the City and Washington County to identify and reserve sufficient
space for a future trail corridor along the western right-of-way line of Manning Avenue.
Comments: The proposed Manning Avenue right-of-way is consistent with County
requirements, as the planned roadway segment includes room for trails on one or both sides of
the right-of-way. The County’s future plans for Manning Avenue include a trail along the
western side of this road.
4) The applicant shall submit a landscape plan prepared by landscape architect for review and
approval by the City. The landscape plan submittal will include a tree protection and
replacement plan consistent with City ordinances. Comments: The applicant submitted
updated Preliminary Landscape Plans dated 12/17/2014 with the application for 1st Addition
Final Plat. Revised landscape plans were submitted with the 2017 Preliminary Plat revisions.
The Applicant will need to address comments outlined in this report and obtain approval prior
to recording of the 3rd Addition Final Plat.
5) The final plat will incorporate all review comments from the City’s landscape architect, including
the selection and mix of plantings within storm water basins and infiltration areas. Comments:
Please see above condition.
6) The landscape plan shall include additional plantings around the Northern Natural Gas utility
site. Comments: The submitted Final Plat Landscape Plans are generally consistent with
approved Preliminary Landscape Plans in this easement area.
7) The proposed access to Manning Avenue will be permitted as a temporary access until such time
that the Village Parkway is connected to 30th Street. The construction plans will be updated to
reflect the temporary nature of this street. Comments: The applicant asked during the 1st
Addition Final Plat that this provision be updated to state that the temporary access will be
allowed for a minimum of five years. Staff was supportive of this revision and has updated the
proposed conditions the 1st Addition Final Plat approval to reflect the change. This condition
is not relevant to the 3rd Addition Final Plat.
8) The applicant shall be responsible for the construction of all improvements within the Manning
Avenue (CSAH 15) right-of-way as required by Washington County and further described in the
review letter received from the County dated June 24, 2014. The final construction plans for
the 1st Addition were updated to incorporate the required improvements to Manning Avenue.
This condition is not relevant to the 3rd Addition final plat.
9) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland
Conservation Act, and shall acquire the needed permits from the appropriate watershed districts
for the storm water management system prior to the commencement of any grading or
development activity on the site. Comments: The Applicant has been granted a Valley Branch
Watershed District permit.
7
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
10) The applicant shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the City that clarifies the individuals
or entities responsible for any landscaping installed in areas outside of land dedicated as public
park and open space on the final plat. Comment: A Landscape License Agreement was
executed for the 1st Addition and will be for the 2nd and 3rd Additions.
11) The developer shall provide an updated accounting of the land to be dedicated for park purposes
prior to submission of a final plat. If required, the developer shall be required to pay a fee in lieu
of park land dedication equivalent to the fair market value for the amount of land that is required
to be dedicated for such purposes in the City’s Subdivision Ordinance less the amount of land
that is accepted for park purposes by the City. Any cash payment in lieu of land dedication shall
be paid by the applicant prior to the release of the final plat for recording. Comments: The park
dedication requirements for the entire Easton Village development is 9.84 acres of land,
representing 10% of the development area. During the 1st Addition Final Plat, the applicant
provided an accounting of the land to be dedicated for park purposes, stating that the entire
development will provide 7.29 acres of public park land. Staff had reviewed these numbers
with the 1st Addition Final Plat application and found them to be accurate. The final
agreement with the City concerning either a cash payment for the park land shortfall or future
land dedication should be addressed in the developer’s agreement for Easton Village 3rd
Addition.
12) Any land under which public trails are located will be accepted as park land provided the
developer constructs said trails as part of the public improvements for the subdivision.
Comments: The Applicant will receive parkland dedication credit for the 0.091 acre Outlot B.
13) All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in a review letter dated
June 26, 2014 shall be incorporated into the plans prior to consideration of a final plat.
Comments. The preliminary plat and plans have been updated to address the City Engineer’s
review comments and were approved on June 21, 2017.
14) The City and developer will determine the appropriate distribution of future costs associated with
the Village Parkway railroad crossing improvements as part of a developer’s agreement for any
portion of Easton Village. Comments: Staff will be drafting a developer’s agreement for
consideration by the Council that will incorporate a section dealing with this provision.
15) The developer shall address any comments from Metropolitan Airport Commission as part of a
final plat submission for any portion of Easton Village. MAC will be asked to comment on the
landscape plan, and the plan shall be revised to address any specific comments concerning the
appropriate vegetation to be planted within storm water facilities. Comments: MAC has
provided a review of the updated plans and provided comments to the developer in a letter
dated December 8, 2015. This letter contains recommended mitigation strategies to reduce the
attractiveness of the storm water retention and infiltration areas for waterfowl. Other
recommendations from MAC have been incorporated into the applicant’s landscape plans.
Mac’s comments about noise mitigation and notification about the airport are relevant to the
3rd Addition Final Plat.
16) The landscape plan shall be revised to eliminate all trees planted within the Lake Elmo Airport
Regulatory Protection Zone. Comments. The Preliminary and 1st Addition landscape plans
have been updated accordingly. MAC’s comments are not relevant to the 3rd Addition Final
Plat.
8
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
17) The final plat shall include a paved trail connection between Lots 13 and 14 of Block 3.
Comments: This condition is not relevant to the 3rd Addition Final Plat. This trail was
removed with 2nd Addition approval.
18) The applicant shall submit written acknowledgement from the property owner of the parcel
immediately to the south of Easton Village concerning the storm water being outlet running into
their property. Comments: Since the approval of the preliminary plat, the applicant has met
with the watershed district, county, and Gonyea Homes to discuss the proposed storm water
management system along Manning Avenue. This condition is not relevant to the 3rd Addition
Final Plat.
19) The applicant is encouraged to incorporate elements from the Lake Elmo Theming Study into the
open space areas within the subdivision. Comments: This was Staff recommendation at the
time of Preliminary Plat to encourage the applicant to utilize a white “horse fence” with
landscaping in order to address the comments from MAC to provide a barrier around the
storm water ponds. This fence was not erected, but instead additional landscaping was
installed to provide screening. The applicant’s landscape plan for the 1st Addition incorporated
elements from the theming study, including the proposed entrance monument sign. This
condition is not relevant to the 3rd Addition Final Plat.
20) The developer shall obtain all required permits from Northern Natural Gas to perform
construction work over the gas line that runs from north to south across this site. Comments.
Northern Natural Gas provided review comments to the developer in has submitted final
construction plans to the gas company for review, and will need to abide by any conditions
imposed by Northern Natural Gas.
21) The developer shall be required to extend sewer to the northernmost boundary of the site.
Comments. The Easton Village Trunk Sewer Line project has been completed and has
extended sanitary sewer service to the northern boundary of the plat, connecting to the sewer
line recently installed by the City of Lake Elmo under the railroad tracks that continues
further north (and connects to the 39th Street line also recently installed by the City).
Staff is recommending certain conditions that been specifically identified as part of the final plat
review, and that have not otherwise been addressed by the applicant, be addressed as part of the
Planning Commission’s recommendation to the City Council. The City Engineer’s review letter does
identify several issues that need to be addressed by the developer in order for the City to deem the
final plans complete. Staff is recommending that City Officials not sign the final plat mylars until
the City’s construction plan review is finalized and all necessary easements are documented on the
final plat.
Based on the above Staff report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the final plat with
several conditions intended to address the outstanding issues noted above and to further clarify the
City’s expectations in order for the developer to proceed with the recording of the final plat.
The recommended conditions are as follows:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
9
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
1) Final grading, drainage, and erosion control plans, sanitary and storm water management
plans, landscape plans, and street and utility construction plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer and applicable Staff prior to the recording of the Final Plat.
All changes and modifications to the plans requested by the City Engineer in the
memorandums addressing Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat and Easton Village 3rd
Addition Construction Plan Review dated May 25, 2017 in the memo shall be incorporated
into these documents before they are approved.
2) Prior to the execution of the Final Plat by City officials, the Developer shall enter into a
Developer’s Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney and approved by the City Council
that delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of the required
improvements for the Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat with financial guarantees
therefore.
3) All easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works Department shall be
documented on the Final Plat prior to its execution by City Officials.
4) The Applicant shall submit an updated Landscape Plan that is consistent with Preliminary
Landscape Plans. The updated plans will need to be approved by the City.
5) A Landscape License Agreement shall be executed for the maintenance o f commonly held
HOA and City outlots and right-of-ways prior to release of the final plat by City Officials.
6) A temporary easement for the temporary cul-de-sac connecting 33rd Street North to Village
Parkway shall be fully executed on the City standard easement agreement form.
7) The applicant shall provide a disclosure statement to all first homeowners in the development
advising of the airport and associated over-flights.
8) All builders shall be encouraged to incorporate interior noise reduction measures i nto single
family residential structures within the subdivision based on the Metropolitan Council’s
Builder Guide.
9) The developer shall abide by any conditions of approval as listed in permits issued by
Northern Natural Gas to perform construction work over the gas line that runs from north to
south across this site.
DRAFT FINDINGS
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to
the proposed Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat:
1) That all the requirements of City Code Section 153.07 related to the Final Plan and Final Plat
have been met by the Applicant.
2) That the proposed Final Plat for Easton Village 3rd Addition consists of the creation of 28
single-family detached residential structures.
10
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
3) That the Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat is generally consistent with the Preliminary
Plat and Plans as approved by the City of Lake Elmo on July 15, 2014 and as amended to
comply with conditions of preliminary plat approval with the exceptions of issues identified
in the June 12, 2017 Staff report to the Planning Commission.
4) That the Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area.
5) That the Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat complies with the City’s Urban Low Density
Residential zoning district regulations.
6) That the Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat complies with all other applicable zoning
requirements, including the City’s landscaping, storm water, sedim ent and erosion control
and other ordinances with the exception of issues identified in the June 12, 2017 Staff report
to the Planning Commission.
7) That the Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat complies with the City’s subdivision
ordinance.
8) That the Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat is generally consistent with the City’s
engineering standards with the exception of necessary plan revisions outlined by the City
Engineer in his review comments to the City dated May 25, 2017.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the 3rd Addition Final Plat
for Easton Village with the 9 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff report. Suggested motion:
“Move to recommend approval of the Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat with the 9 conditions
of approval as drafted by Staff”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Form
2. City Engineer Review Memo Dated May 25, 2017
3. Easton Village 3rd Addition Final Plat and Plans
4. Pages from Revised Preliminary Plans dated June 21, 2017
5. Valley Branch Watershed District Permit
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ........................................................................................ Planning Staff
- Report by Staff ................................................................................... Planning Staff
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Open the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Close the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
11
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
EASTON VILLAGE 3RD ADDITION
FINAL PLAT WRITTEN STATEMENTS
February 14, 2017
A)PROJECT CONTACTS:
OWNER:DEVELOPER:
Tom Wolter Tom Wolter
Easton Village, LLC Chase Development
2140 County Road 42 West 2140 County Road 42 West
Burnsville, MN 55337 Burnsville, MN 55337
Phone: 952-292-0046 Phone: 952-292-0046
timbercrest@ymail.com timbercrest@ymail.com
AUTHORIZED AGENT:
Project Contact/Engineer:
Todd A.Erickson, PE
EricksonCivil
333 North Main Street, Suite 201
Stillwater, MN 55082
Phone: 612-309-3804
todd@tericksonllc.com
Surveyor:
Paul A. Johnson, LS, EricksonCivil
Landscape Architect:
David Chmielewski, LA, EricksonCivil
EASTON VILLAGE 3rd ADDITION
FINAL PLAT WRITTEN STATEMENTS
Page 2 of 4
Lot Block Area (Sq. Ft.) Area (Acre)Lot Width (1)Lot Depth (2)
1 1 11,194 0.257 70 160
2 1 11,167 0.256 70 160
3 1 10,935 0.251 70 155
1 2 16,641 0.382 83 200
2 2 8,140 0.187 67 120
3 2 9,405 0.216 75 125
4 2 8,522 0.196 65 130
5 2 8,555 0.196 70 130
6 2 8,483 0.195 65 130
7 2 8,836 0.203 65 130
8 2 10,237 0.235 77 135
9 2 12,143 0.279 87 145
10 2 11,958 0.275 75 150
1 3 14,294 0.328 72 197
2 3 9,217 0.212 67 138
3 3 9,231 0.212 67 135
4 3 9,124 0.209 65 130
5 3 8,450 0.194 65 130
6 3 9,100 0.209 70 130
7 3 8,724 0.200 70 130
8 3 8,138 0.187 70 130
9 3 9,777 0.224 75 130
10 3 10,307 0.237 70 130
11 3 12,769 0.293 65 155
12 3 15,491 0.356 65 175
13 3 12,330 0.283 65 150
14 3 9,519 0.219 65 132
15 3 8,650 0.199 65 132
Outlot A 4,814 0.111
Outlot B 3,971 0.091
ROAD RIGHT OF WAY 118,498 2.720 (Includes Village Parkway)
TOTAL AREA DEVELOPED 418,620 9.610
(1) Lot width at setback shown on plan
(2) Average approximate lot length, some lots are irregular in shape (see plan for exact dimensions)
B)SITE DATA:
Address: No current address.32xx Lilac Lane North.
Current Zoning: LDR
Parcel Size:9.61 Acres,418,620 Sq. Ft.
PID No.:13.029.21.42.0025
Current Legal:Part of Outlot F, Easton Village, Washington County, Minnesota.See also
Final Plat Dedication Page 1 of 2.
C)FINAL SUBDIVISION AND LOT INFORMATION:
Name of Final Plat:Easton Village 3rd Addition
Table of Proposed Lots:
EASTON VILLAGE 3rd ADDITION
FINAL PLAT WRITTEN STATEMENTS
Page 3 of 4
Area of Parks and Trails:Oulot B, Trail, 0.091 Acres, $38,000 cost.
Area of Wetlands and Buffers:None on this proposed addition.
Final Area of Dedicated Right of Way:1.684 Acres
Legal Description of All Lots:See Final Plat Graphics, Sheet 2 of 2.
Easements to be Vacated:Temporary Roadway Easement (Easton Village)
D.EXPLANATION OF ISSUES SINCE PRELIMINARY PLAT:
This addition of the Easton Village project requires additional import to complete. The
stockpile of this material will continue to the north of the Third Addition where a portion of
the needed material is currently stockpiled today. This operation started with the grading of
Phase II of Easton Village, with the hope of obtaining all of the material from the City
infiltration project, which did not happen. This addition will also finalize the gas line crossing
issue, which adjusted the pond elevation and HWL of the northeast pond to accommodate the
storm sewer outlet of the City infiltration basin project which help to raise up the outfall to
accommodate the gas line.The proposed grading will also relieve the water that is currently
flowing across the farm field to the outlet structure of the first addition to Easton Village.
Also, the lot layout has been revised to adjust to market conditions, allowing for wider lots and
a mixture of lots to create more variety and options for builders. This adjustment of lots will
not alter the overall density and is not a request to increase or decrease the overall density of
the preliminary plat, only a request to adjust lot lines to accommodate some more variety for
the overall subdivision.
E.FINAL DENSITY:
Same as presented for Preliminary Plat Documents. Below is a summary of the density
calculation of the preliminary plat of Easton Village:
AR
E
A
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
PARK AREA 7.96
OPEN SPACE 18.90
LOT AREA 52.25
RIGHT OF WAY 19.37
RUNWAY PROTECTION
ZONE 4.77
STEEP SLOPE AREAS 2.65
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA 98.47
TOTAL PROPOSED LOTS 217
PERCENT OF OPEN
SPACE/PARK 27.3%
GROSS DENSITY 2.20
NET DENSITY*2.38
EASTON VILLAGE 3rd ADDITION
FINAL PLAT WRITTEN STATEMENTS
Page 4 of 4
F.INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVMENTS:
The proposed storm sewer will be connected to the existing storm sewer constructed with
Easton Village. The water main and sanitary sewer will be extended from the constructed
water and sewer of Easton Village. All utilities will be constructed per city standards.The
storm water ponding for this addition has been planned for and will be accommodated by the
existing constructed pond of Easton Village.Stubs for water and sewer will be installed for
future phases of the overall project.
G.CONCERNS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES:
No known issues.
H.CONFLICTS WITH NEARBY LAND USES:
No known issues.
I.JUSTIFICATION RELATING TO BURDEN ON EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE:
This project is a part of an overall larger project, which density has been planned for with the
installation of a trunk sewer and watermain and highway right turn and bypass lane for access,
therefore this project will not create any undue burden on the existing infrastructure of the City
or surrounding area.In addition to the water and sewer charges the City will get from this
project, it will add approximately $20,000 a year in tax payments to the City of Lake Elmo, with
additional tax payments going to the County, School District and Met Council to offset any
“burden”created by this project.
J.PROPOSED LAKESHORE ACCESS:
None Proposed.
K.PROPOSED PARKS AND OPEN SPACE:
Outlot B, proposed as trail connection open space.Outlot A, open space for planting of trees.
Easton Village currently contains a park and open space, dedicated with the first addition of the
project.
L.CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE:
Construction would be expected to begin as soon as possible in the spring of 2017. Substantial
completion of the project would occur in the fall of 2017.
PAGE 1 of 1
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 25, 2017
To: Stephen Wensman, City Planner Re: Easton Village 3rd Addition – Final Plat
Cc: Chad Isakson, P.E., Municipal Engineer Engineering Review Comments
From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer
An engineering review has been completed for Easton Village 3rd Addition. Final Plat/Construction Plans were
received on May 4, 2017. The submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Erickson Civil:
Easton Village Preliminary Plat Revisions dated April 28, 2017.
Easton Village 2nd and 3rd Additions Drainage Analysis dated April 28, 2017.
Easton Village 3rd Addition Construction Plans and Final Plat dated April 28, 2017.
Easton Village 3rd Final Plat Narrative dated February 14, 2017.
STATUS/FINDINGS: Engineering review comments have been provided in two separate memos; one for Final Plat
approval, and one to assist with the completion of the final Construction Plans. Please see the following review
comments relating to the Final Plat application.
FINAL PLAT: EASTON VILLAGE 3RD ADDITION
Outlots A (Stormwater) and B (Bituminous Trail) must be dedicated to the City as part of the Final Plat. City
ownership of the Outlots must be noted on the final construction plans.
All easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works department shall be documented on the
Final Plat prior to the release of the Final Plat for recording.
Final Plat should be contingent upon the City receiving copies of fully executed temporary easements using
the City standard agreement form for the temporary cul‐de‐sac and connecting street to Village Parkway.
Final Plat should be contingent upon the applicant updating the preliminary plans in accordance with the
engineering review memorandum dated May 23, 2017 and approved by the City Engineer.
Final Plat should be contingent upon the applicant updating the plans to maintain all 100‐year HWL elevations
within easement areas and revising the plans for all storm water ponds to meet City design requirements.
Easton Village 3rd Addition includes trunk watermain (12‐inch diameter) pipe oversizing along Lilac Avenue
North. Payment for pipe oversizing from the City standard 8‐inch pipe should be addressed as part of the
development agreement.
No construction for Easton Village 3rd Addition may begin until the applicant has received City Engineer
approval for the Final Construction Plans; the applicant has obtained and submitted to the City all applicable
permits, easements and permissions needed for the project; and a preconstruction meeting has been held by
the City’s engineering department.
The Final Plat shall not be recorded until final construction plan approval is granted.
Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be revised in accordance with the Construction Plan
engineering review memorandum dated May 25, 2017 and approved by the City Engineer. Final Construction
Plans and Specifications must be prepared in accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual
using City details, plan notes and specifications and meeting City Engineering Design Guidelines.
FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261
Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264
Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267
Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4283