Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Packet; 09-25-17 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 September 25, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. AGENDA 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approve Agenda 3. Approve Minutes a. September 11, 2017 4. Public Hearings a. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) CONCEPT PLAN. Requests by continental 419 Fund LLC c/o Gwyn Wheeler, W134 N8675 Executive parkway, Menomonee Falls, WI 53051, for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide the City’s Land Use Plan for a portion of PID #34.029.21.43.0003 from Urban Medium Density Residential to Urban High Density Residential and PUD Concept Plan for a 300 unit multifamily development. b. VARIANCE. A request by Peter and Adrienne Pavek of 8130 Hill Trail N for a variance from minimum setback requirements for a septic system from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) within a shoreland district and property lines as well as a variance to allow expansion of a non-conforming structure that does not meet minimum setback requirements from the OHWL within a shoreland district. PID #09.029.21.22.0007. c. VARIANCE. A request by Benjamin Osterollo of 8323 Deer Pond Trail N for a variance from minimum setback requirements from the front yard to allow expansion of an existing garage. PID #09.029.21.34.0002. 5. Business Items a. 6. Updates a. City Council Updates – 9/19/17 Meeting i. Royal Golf Development Agreement - passed ii. Northport Development Agreement - passed iii. Hidden Meadows Final Plat Extension Denial - passed Staff Updates iv. Upcoming Meetings:  October 11, 2017  October 23, 2017 v. MAC CEP Report-none vi. Comprehensive Plan Update 2 b. 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; 9-11-17 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 11, 2017 Chairman Kreimer called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Kreimer, Lundquist, Hartley, Dodson, Emerson, Williams, & Larson COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Johnson & Dorschner STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Becker Approve Agenda: Agenda was accepted as presented Approve Minutes: August 28, 2017 M/S/P: Hartley/Williams, move to approve the August 28, 2017 minutes as amended, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing Item – Zoning Text Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment and Conditional Use Permit Mare Affair LLC Becker started her presentation regarding the application from Mare Affair Farms for the 4 requests regarding the property. The requests include 1) a ZTA to allow a Commercial Boarding Facility as a conditional accessory use within the Agricultural Zoning District 2) A ZMA to rezone 10880 Stillwater Blvd from Rural Development Transitional to Agriculture 3) A Conditional Use Permit to allow a Commercial Boarding Facility as an accessory use and 4) a Conditional Use Permit for expansion to an existing feedlot within a shoreland area. The Comprehensive Plan specifically states that existing agricultural uses and qualifying alternative uses that preserve the open space within the community shall be supported and encouraged to continue operations and to retain large land holdings. The term Commercial Boarding Facility is being used because of the state statute governing classification of agricultural property. Becker went through the proposed definition of Commercial Boarding Facility and what the standards are that already exist in the Zoning Code. 2 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 9-11-17 As a recommended condition of approval of the Zoning Map Amendment, the City must approve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to either remove the property from the MUSA, or approve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide the Property to an Urban Residential Land use designation as well as a ZMA to re-zone the property to a related Urban Residential zoning district if the property is developed. The applicant and the City have been in discussions for some time about Stormwater ponds and trails. The applicant is open to the stormwater issue but there needs to be further discussion. The County has a trail plan and is looking for a trail along Stillwater Blvd. The applicant is not amenable to the trail on the North side of Stillwater Blvd because of the horses. The Conditional Use Permit for the Commercial Boarding Facility is to keep, train and ride horses that do not belong to the owner or occupant on the property. The standards are met for setbacks, parking requirements, and number of structures. There are some outstanding issues that can be dealt with as conditions of approval. These include 1) landscaping around outdoor exercise arena 2) manure management plan required 3) needs VBWD approval 4) MPCA review and approval 5) turn lanes designed and approved by Washington County 6) Events and living space within barn will require proper fire apparatus and connection to water. Based on the City Engineer review, a number of conditions of approval were added to include 1) hydro CAD model and permit approved by the City 2) Grading & Erosion control plan required and approved 3) site plan to include location of wells 4) capacity of on -site septic systems. Hartley asked if this meets the definition of a feedlot. Becker stated that it does, however, the MPCA has determined that it does not need an MPCA permit. Dodson asked how hard is it to withdraw from the MUSA or get added back in later. Becker stated that they might be updating the MUSA with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Becker stated that the applicant is not requesting to be removed from the MUSA at this time. That would come into play when they subdivide or develop. Emerson asked if the Gonyea West property was still proposing a road coming dow n to this property. Becker stated that it probably will not as this stable proposal has significantly scaled back. Becker stated that the road would be discussed with Gonyea West. Kreimer asked about the County comment regarding the trail. Becker stated that the County is currently working on their Comprehensive Plan and they are looking at a trail along Stillwater Blvd. Becker pointed out that the City cannot require a trail at this time as the property is not being subdivided. Rich Roth, Morton Buildings, on behalf of the Schiltgen Family. Williams asked if there is a proposed location for the manure building. Roth stated that they do not have a definite location yet, but the MPCA plans to do a site visit and work with them on the 3 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 9-11-17 location. The preferred location would be by the commodities building. This area is in the Shoreland, but there is a bluff there so everything flows across the open area to the East. Williams asked about the flood storage pond. Roth stated that the Schiltgens have no need for a flood storage pond to service their property. Roth’s understanding is that the City and other developments have a need for the flood storage pond. They are however, open to discussion. Molly Schiltgen, Mare Affair, stated that the family h as no plans to ever develop the property. This is a vision that the family has always had to preserve this property along with the barns that go around it. Schiltgen stated that there are 12 stalls in the new barn proposal. They do not want to limit themselves, but she doesn’t think there would ever be more than 20 horses. Pete Schiltgen estimates there is about 110 grazeable acres. Kreimer asked if there would be riding lessons at the site. Schiltgen stated that there would be lessons, but on a very small scale. There would not be more than 5 people in the arena at any given time. Larson asked if the property includes both the North and South side of County 14. Schiltgen stated that Mare Affair Farms includes the property on the North and South side of County 14. There is about 20 acres on the south side that is a hay field that they need to support the operation of the farm and an additional 20 acres of hay field to the North. Public Hearing opened at 7:45 pm Joe Chavez, 3505 Kelvin Ave N, they own a parcel on Sunfish Lake that is approximately 11 acres that borders the Schiltgen parcel south of the Hamlet. He is wondering what impact this development will have on their parcel as they are working to get their parcel designated as a buildable lot. Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33rd Street, supports this project and feels that this project is part of the vision for this area. Joan Chavez, 3505 Kelvin Ave N, just wanted to add their support for this project and they are really excited about it. There was no written correspondence Public Hearing closed at 7:50 pm Williams thinks it is a great proposal and feels that they should recommend approval. Williams does feel that despite the lay of the land, he is not in favor of approving a manure storage facility within the shoreland district. M/S/F: Williams/Lundquist, move to add condition #13 that any manure storage facility must be located outside the shoreland district, Vote: 1-6, motion fails. 4 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 9-11-17 Emerson feels that the topography of the land all runs away from the Lake so he doesn’t see a problem. Williams is not comfortable with it and does not want to set any kind of a precedent for any future proposals. Emerson feels that it would create a lot more work and inconvenience for the applicant and if the MPCA approves it, so should the City. Larson feels that more information is needed regarding the impact on Sunfish Lake. However the practical problem of moving this closer to Lake Elmo Elementary, could create a problem in regards to odors. Hartley stated that without the manure management plan, it is hard to know the impacts. Becker stated that this is something that would be reviewed with the VBWD permit. The VBWD along with the MPCA would need to give their approval to locate the manure storage facility in the Shoreland district. M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to add finding #13 that the City should remove this property from the MUSA, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Lundquist/Williams, move to recommend approval of a Zoning Text Amendment to allow Commercial Boarding Facility as a conditional accessory use within the Agricultural Zoning District, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Lundquist/Williams, move to recommend approval of a Zoning Map Amendment to rezone 10880 Stillwater Blvd N (PID #14.029.21.11.0001) from Rural Development Transitional to Agricultural, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Kreimer/Dodson, move to strike condition #11 regarding screening, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Lundquist/Emerson, move to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Commercial Boarding Facility as an accessory use for the property located at 10880 Stillwater Blvd N (PID #14.029.21.21.0001), subject to the recommended conditions of approval and findings as amended, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Lundquist/Williams, move to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of an existing feedlot within the shoreland for the property located at 10880 Stillwater Blvd N (PID #14.029.21.11.0001), subject to the recommended conditions of approval, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. City Council Updates – September 5, 2017 Meeting i) Royal Golf PUD Final Plat – passed ii) Village Park Preserve Final Plat – passed iii) Hidden Meadows Final Plat Extension - failed Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings 5 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 9-11-17 a. September 25, 2017 b. October 11, 2017 2. MAC CEP Report Commission Concerns Meeting adjourned at 8:24 pm Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertman Planning Program Assistant STAFF REPORT DATE: 9/25/17 REGULAR ITEM #: 4A TO: Planning Commission FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Re-Guide a Portion of PID# 34.029.21.43.0003 from Urban Medium Density Residential to Urban High Density Residential and General Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for Continental Properties REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: The City has received a request from Continental 419 Fund LLC c/o Gwyn Wheeler for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide a portion of PID# 34.029.21.43.0003 from Urban Medium Density Residential to Urban High Density Residential along with a General Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan for a 300 unit multi-family development on a 21.60 acre parcel to be called Springs Apartments. ISSUE BEFORE COMMISSION: The Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing, review and make recommendation on the above- mentioned requests from Continental 419 Fund LLC c/o Gwyn Wheeler. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: General Information.  Property Owner: DPS-Lake Elmo, LLC of 6007 Culligan Way, Minnetonka, MN 55345  Location: South of the Savona development and North of Hudson Blvd. N  Current Site Area: 39.88 acres  Land Use Guidance: Urban Medium Density Residential on the northern portion of the property and Commercial on the southern portion  Zoning: Rural Development Transitional  Surrounding Land Use Guidance: Medium Density Residential to the East, Urban Medium Density Residential to the North, Urban Medium Density Residential to the West, and Commercial to the South.  History: The property has been used as rural vacant land. CONCEPT PUD PLAN About the Applicant. Continental 419 Fund LLC. (Applicant) desires to develop a Class A, market-rate apartment community within the City. The company, started in 1979, is based out of Menomonee Falls, WI, and as of 2016 has broken ground on 3,175 apartment homes in 7 states. 65 Springs Apartment communities, similar to this proposed development, have been developed, including three in Minnesota (Apple Valley, Rochester, and Savage). The applicant has indicated in pre-application meetings with Staff that Continental owns and operates all Springs developments and that they do not have third party management. Site Plan. The proposed site plan consists of 21.6 acres of land and includes 15 buildings with 20 units each, four detached garages (three with 12 stalls each and one with six stalls), parking spaces, an approximately 4,000 square foot club house (including a large gathering room, fitness center, kitchen area, coffee bar, and office space), pool with sun deck along with an outdoor bar-be-que area, trash enclosure, mail kiosk, and two pet playgrounds all within a fenced, controlled access community. Many units provide attached, direct-access garages. The remaining parcel would be platted as an outlot until development. Proposed Unit Breakdown. The proposed number of units totals 300. The following provides a breakdown of the proposed number of units: Unit Type Number of Units Studios 30 1-Bedroom 120 2-Bedroom 120 3-Bedroom 30 Proposed Design. The proposed design of the development is a townhouse design two stories in height with private, ground-level entrances to each unit. The building elevations provide architectural interest with use of exterior accents, a large percentage of windows, and high quality materials including fiber cement board siding and stone masonry. The buildings create additional high architectural value with use of varied roof lines, and vertical and horizontal articulation. The typical interiors of the units include dark wood colored cabinets, stainless steel appliances, granite countertops in all kitchens and wood laminate flooring. Select units will be upgraded to include enhanced finishes, painted access walls, granite countertops throughout, among other features. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Although the proposed amendment is not strictly consistent with the guided land use for this area within the Comprehensive Plan, as the area is currently guided for Urban Medium Density Residential with a density 4.5-7 units per acre, and the proposed density is 13.89 units per acre, Chapter II of the Comprehensive Plan, City-Wide Planning Policy, indicates the following:  “It shall be the Policy of the City, by adopted plans, programs, and development regulations, to permit the provision by private developers of a variety of housing types for all people of all stages of the life cycle. It will also be the Policy of the City to encourage retention and development of housing affordable to a broad range of incomes while maintaining a fiscally responsible ratio of municipal services to provide real estate tax revenue to support those municipal services. o Low Amount of Existing Rental Units. 2015 statistics indicate that roughly 93% of Lake Elmo residents own their home, which is significantly higher above the homeownership rate of Washington County and the metropolitan area. This could be due to a lack of available rental units within the City. According to the Metropolitan Council Housing Existing Housing Assessment for the City of Lake Elmo (February 2017), there are only 204 rental units within the city. Increasing availability of rental units could allow those who are unable to own their own home live within the City. o Housing Cost Burdened Households. According to the Metropolitan Council Housing Existing Housing Assessment for the City of Lake Elmo (February 2017), there are 418 cost-burdened households within the city whose housing costs are at least 30% of their income. o Need for Affordable Housing. The Metropolitan Council’s 2015 Systems Statement indicates that Lake Elmo’s share of the region’s need for low and moderate income housing is 508 new units affordable to households earning 80% of the area median income (AMI) or below. Of these new units, the need is for 27 affordable to households earning at or below 30% of AMI, 179 affordable to households earning 31% to 50% of AMI, and 302 affordable to households earning 51% to 80% of AMI. o According to data from the Minneapolis Association of Realtors, the median home sales price for Lake Elmo in 2016 was $407,070. This is over 75% more than the metropolitan area median home sales price ($232,000). By allowing a high density development within this area of the City, which currently has access to City sewer and water, younger professionals and aging adults who cannot yet afford homes in Lake Elmo’s current price range will be able to live in the community in which they grew up and enjoy.  “Examples of adherence to these housing policies include…..Affirmative City actions to address support for senior and age-restricted housing initiatives within the Regional Sewered areas…south of 10th Street North that demonstrate high standards of design, materials, and resident amenities. Ease of resident access to goods and services within the context of the non- residential development policies of this plan will be an important locational determinant in recognition of the reduced mobility of senior and age-restricted residents. Such goods and services shall be facility-integrated with the residential uses intended to be served…” o Continental has indicated in pre-application meetings that 20% of their residents are typically 55+. Locating such a development in close proximity to an area guided for commercial development would, in the future, provide easy access for such members of the community to needed goods and services that will likely become available with an increase in residential development.  “Affirmative City actions to address support of expanded opportunity for development of new housing resources affordable to families of moderate income within the areas of the City planned for service by Regional Wastewater Treatment.” o As mentioned, the proposed increase density will allow for families of moderate income to live within the community.  “City financial subsidy in support of housing opportunities is not implied by this Policy.” o Continental is not requesting City financial subsidy for the proposed project.  “By zoning and other City codes, the City will encourage housing development that respects the natural environment of the community while striving to accommodate the need for a variety of housing types and costs.” o The proposed development is consistent with that of the surrounding area. The Savona townhomes that currently exist to the northeast of the site are similar in design and style to that of the proposed development. Additionally, the proposed development will accommodate the need for a variety of housing types and costs.  “Municipal Services…Provision of municipal services will not be in a manner that drives intensive development, but rather responsive to the intensity of development specified by the Comprehensive Plan.” o As previously mentioned in the Engineering review comments, the site was projected to have 145 REC units, although the site is able to handle the additional REC units either internally as part of the site work or by replacing 250 feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer with 10-inch sanitary sewer. Consistency with Planned Unit Development Regulations. Staff has reviewed the proposed plan for its consistency with requirements of Article XVII: Planned Unit Development (PUD) Regulations and has found the following:  Intent. The intent of a PUD is to provide for flexibility in the use of land and the placement and size of buildings in order to better utilize site features and obtain a higher quality of development. A PUD is required for the proposed development, as more than one principal building is proposed to be placed on a platted lot, and the proposed garages are larger than the maximum-allowed 1,000 square feet in size.  Identified Objectives. When reviewing requests for PUDs, the City is to consider whether one or more objectives as outlined in Section 154.751: Identified Objectives of the Zoning Code will be served or is achieved. Staff has found that the following objectives are being met with the proposed development. A. Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than conventional approaches.  The proposed development is not a typical, multi-story apartment building and instead proposes a townhouse design two stories in height with private, ground- level entrances to each unit C. Provision of a more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development techniques.  The proposed development is proposing a number of recreational amenities to residents within the PUD including pet playgrounds, clubhouse, and pool. D. Accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities and/or commercial facilities; and especially to create additional opportunities for senior and affordable housing.  The proposed development will provide additional housing opportunities within the City, as there are currently very few multi-family buildings within the City. G. Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within the development and surrounding land uses.  The townhouse design will be compatible in design those of the neighboring Savona townhomes. H. Higher standards of site and building design than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development technique.  The City does not currently have standards for single family housing. As such, the City cannot impose guidelines and standards set forth with the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines & Standards Manual. However, the City may impose such guidelines on high density residential development.  Minimum Requirements. PUDs must meet the following minimum requirements: A. Lot Area. A PUD must include a minimum of 5 acres for undeveloped land or 2 acres for developed land within the approved development.  The proposed development exceeds this requirement with a proposed 21.60 acre development. B. Open Space: For all PUDs, at least 20% of the project area not within street rights-of- way to be preserved as protected open space. Other public or site amenities may be approved as an alternative to this requirement. Any required open space must be available to the residents, tenants, or customers of the PUD for recreational purposes or similar benefit. Land reserved for storm water detention facilities and other required site improvements may be applied to this requirement. Open space shall be designed to meet the needs of residents of the PUD and the surrounding neighborhoods, to the extent practicable, for parks, playgrounds, playing fields and other recreational facilities.  The applicant has indicated that approximately 42% of the proposed development is open space (including detention ponds, pet areas, green spaces, and landscaped areas). C. Street Layout… In newly developing areas, streets shall be designed to maximize connectivity in each cardinal direction, except where environmental or physical constraints make this infeasible. All streets shall terminate at other streets, at public land, or at a park or other community facility, except that local streets may terminate in stub streets when those will be connected to other streets in future phases of the development or adjacent developments.  The proposed new road connecting 5th Street to Hudson Blvd meets this requirement. Junco Road was intended to continue on through part of this development, though the proposed development will cause it to terminate at the intersection of 5th Street. It is a recommended condition of approval that all comments outlined in the Engineering memo dated September 7, 2017 be addressed. The comments in this memo required that improvements to this intersection be made as part of this project. Proposed Amenities. The City’s PUD ordinance provides that amenities may be provided for increased density. In this case, because the applicant is proposing a Comprehensive Plan amendment to re-guide the area to Urban High Density Residential, which would accommodate the proposed density of the development, an increase in density beyond the desired land use designation is not required. However, a PUD should still offer the City amenities in exchange for the flexibility of allowing more than one building on a parcel as well as allowing garages larger than 1,000 square feet.  Underground or structure parking. The narrative of the application indicates that many units provide attached, direct-access garages. It has not been indicated that this will reduce the surface parking area outside the footprint of the principal structure by 25%, however, as required by the PUD Code.  Contained Parking. By proposing 162 garage spaces for its residents, the proposed development limits the amount of visible surface parking.  Additional Amenities? Additionally, the City may also consider the allotment of amenity “points” for site amenities that are not otherwise specified within the ordinance. Staff has found that the proposed development offers the following amenities: Consistency with Proposed Urban High Density Residential (HDR) Zoning District. As mentioned, the proposed development will require City approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment as well as a Zoning Map Amendment to rezone the property to Urban High Density Residential. As such, review of the proposed General PUD Concept Plan Review against standards including setbacks, impervious coverage, etc. of the Urban High Density Residential zoning districts was done, as shown below. Standard Required Proposed Impervious Surface Maximum 75% 58% Minimum Lot Width 60 feet 199.09 feet at the smallest proposed width Front Yard Setback 20 feet 20 feet Interior Side Yard 15 feet 20 feet Corner Side Yard 10 feet 20 feet Rear Yard Setback 20 feet 20 feet Parking (specific to multi-family development within HDR zoning district) Not to be located in the front yard or between the front façade and street. Parking is located in front of Building 3, though this is not necessarily considered the front yard. Open space (specific to multi- family development within HDR zoning district) 200 square feet of common open space provided per unit. Approximately 1300 square feet of open space is provided for each unit. Adherence to Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards. The proposed development adheres to the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards in that:  The proposed structures are located and oriented in a manner that allows for pedestrian accessibility and provides visual interest from the public right-of-way.  Buildings are located as close to the public street as possible, easily accessible from the street; setbacks are varied slightly; recreational and common spaces are located at the interior or rear of the site.  Streetscapes provide for pedestrian accessibility and safety while offering aesthetically pleasing environments, as 5th Street streetscape is already in place, and a sidewalk/trail is provided along the future road.  Parking areas do not account for more than 50% of street frontage.  Trash enclosure is located away from most of the residential buildings.  Examples of past developments adhere to building design requirements. It is a recommended condition of approval that the applicant include a detailed architectural plan proposal for the development. Parkland Dedication. The Parks Commission will review the proposed development at its October 16, 2017 meeting. The proposed development does not propose a public park but does provide recreation for its residents through the club house, pool and open space. The neighborhood park search area plan of the Comprehensive Plan indicates that a neighborhood park should be located in the below indicated neighborhood park search area. This area is already served by Savona Park. The proposed development consists of 21.60 acres, and the required parkland dedication for the Urban High Density Residential zoning district is 10%. The required amount of fees would be 10% of the purchase price of the property, which has yet to be determined. Trails. The Comprehensive Plan’s Trail Plan shows a planned trail down the proposed street along the west side of the development. The proposed plan indicates a proposed sidewalk along the future road but not a trail. Trail connection requirements along Hudson Blvd need to be reviewed. A crosswalk with pedestrian ramps to cross 5th Street N, should be constructed. Parking. The City’s Zoning Code requires one space per unit, along with one visitor space per four units. With the proposed 300 units, 375 spaces would be required, and 525 spaces are proposed. There are also an additional 17 spaces proposed for the clubhouse. The proposed width and length of parking stalls is compliant with code, and the proposed width (estimated to be 24’) is adequate for a 2-way aisle width according to the Zoning Code. Of these parking spaces, a total of 17 spaces are proposed to be Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-accessible. The ADA requires 2% of parking spaces totaling over 501 to be ADA-accessible, and so the proposed number of ADA parking spaces is compliant, providing adequate width and access aisle spacing. Engineering Comments. The City Engineer has provided a review memo regarding the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and General Concept PUD. This memo is attached for reference. Staff would like to highlight the following comments in summary:  Streets and Transportation o Hudson Right-of-Way. Additional right-of-way on Hudson Blvd must be dedicated. A Hudson Blvd typical section needs to be developed by the City to determine necessary width. 10 foot utility easements must be provided along each side of the new right-of-way. o The concept plan proposes a new commercial street connecting Hudson Blvd and 5th Street N, which is the preferred street and access configuration and align ment. The design must take in to consideration the existing location of the existing sanitary sewer and watermain utilities located in the corridor. o Turn Lanes Needed. An eastbound left turn lane and westbound right turn lane must be constructed along Hudson Blvd as part of the proposed commercial street intersection with Hudson Blvd. o Adjacent Secondary Access. Further review of the secondary access provided to the adjacent property to the southeast will require further review during preliminary planning. o Emergency Access. The unpaved emergency access to 5th Street North should be paved within the City right-of-way. o Perimeter Fence. This encroaches the 10 foot utility easement, and so the location must be revised to preserve the easement. o Intersection Improvements to Junco Road. It is recommended that improvements to the intersection of 5th Street N and Junco Rd be made as part of this project, as this road was intended to continue with future development, yet this site plan proposes Junco Road terminating at 5th Street N. As a result, minor design and construction revisions will be required at the intersection including the construction of a 5th Street crosswalk with pedestrian ramps across 5th Street N, and connecting trail segment, to connect the Savona trail from the park to the sidewalk/trail for the new commercial street. o Traffic Impact Study. Is needed for CSAH 19 and Hudson Blvd and CSAH 19 and 5th Street. Consideration of financial contribution to CSAH 19/Hudson Blvd traffic signal.  Municipal Sanitary Sewer o The subject parcel was projected to contain approximately 145 Residential Equivalency Charge (REC) units, and the site plan proposes 300 REC units. In order to account for these additional units, the site will need to connect to a 10- inch sanitary sewer line.  Municipal Water Supply o The applicant will be responsible to provide watermain stub(s) to the adjacent property to the south. o The existing water system has sufficient capacity for domestic service for the proposed number of REC units. o The applicant will be responsible to place hydrants throughout the property at the direction of the Fire Department.  Stormwater Management o All stormwater facilities need to be in accordance with City and Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) requirements. o Stormwater facilities will need to include both stormwater ponds (detention) and infiltration basins and to remain privately owned, requiring execution and recording of a Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement with the City in its standard form. Maintenance access should be provided. Building Official and Fire Chief Review. The Building Official and Fire Chief have review the proposed plan and have commented that the unpaved, second emergency access will need to be paved and maintained year-round. Snow removal is a significant concern with gated emergency access points. Apple Valley Administrator Opinion. The City Administrator of the City of Apple Valley, a City in which a Springs community has been developed, has emailed Staff and has indicated that the Springs at Apple Valley has been a good addition to the community. Police calls to the development have not been a problem; there are five to six such calls a month, which is not excessive given the 280 units in the development. A report of police calls to the property dating from June 2016 to August 2017 was provided. Property maintenance has not been a problem. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) Review. MNDOT has reviewed the proposed development (review letter attached) and has the following comments:  Hudson Blvd was turned back to the City, but if the road section were owned by MNDOT, a turn lane for the future road connection would be required. Please consider making the portion of Hudson Blvd.  Applicant should assess noise situation and take action deemed necessary to minimize impact of highway noise. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). Staff has confirmed with the Environmental Quality Board that an EAW would not be required for a housing development of this size. An EAW is only required when over 375 attached units are proposed within a city. Neighborhood Meetings. Prior to this public hearing, the applicant held two neighborhood meetings on August 2, 2017 and September 21, 2017. Staff did not attend these neighborhood meetings due to scheduling conflicts, though the applicant indicates that many compliments were given on the site plan, elevations, proposed buffers, and high quality Springs apartment communities. Attendees did have concerns regarding view to the development from their homes. The minutes from the August 2, 2017 meeting is attached; the September 21, 2017 meeting minutes were not ready in time for the distribution of Planning Commission packets, and so the applicant can comment on responses during the meeting. Recommended Findings. Staff recommends approval of the Concept PUD Plan based on the following findings: 1. That if the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map is amended to re-guide the planned development from Urban Medium Density Residential to Urban High Density Residential, the PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the intent of the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. 2. That the PUD Concept Plan complies with the general intent of the Urban High Density Residential zoning districts with PUD modifications. 3. That the PUD Concept Plan generally complies with the City’s Subdivision regulations. 4. That the PUD Concept Plan is generally consistent with the City’s engineering standards with exceptions as noted in the City Engineer’s memorandum dated September 7, 2017. 5. The PUD Concept Plan meets the minimum requirement for a PUD including minimum lot area, open space and street layout. 6. The PUD Concept Plan meets more than one of the required PUD objectives identified in Section 154.751 including providing: innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than conventional approaches; provision of a more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development techniques; accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities and/or commercial facilities; and especially to create additional opportunities for senior and affordable housing; coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within the development and surrounding land uses; and higher standards of site and building design than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development technique. 7. The PUD Concept Plan meets the allowed density requirements provided the Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use Map is amended to re-guide the planned development from Urban Medium Density Residential to Urban High Density Residential. Recommended Conditions of Approval. Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Concept PUD with the following conditions: 1. Approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the City’s Land Use Plan to re-guide a portion of the Property from Urban Medium Density Residential to Urban High Density Residential. 2. That the future preliminary plat and preliminary PUD Plans include a portion of the parcel with the PID# 34.029.21.43.0003. 3. That the future preliminary plat and preliminary PUD Plans submittal identify all requests for flexibility from the Zoning Code. 4. That all comments of the City Engineer’s Memorandum dated September 7, 2017 be addressed with the future preliminary plat and preliminary PUD Plans submittal. 5. That the Preliminary Plat and PUD Plans submittal include a landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by the City’s Landscape Architect. 6. That the Preliminary Plat and PUD Plans submittal include accurate open space and impervious surface calculations. 7. That a trail be provided along the future road providing primary access to the development instead of a sidewalk. 8. That fees in lieu of park land dedication be provided as required by 153.14 with future final plat. 9. That the preliminary plat and preliminary PUD Plans submittal include a detailed architectural plan. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Reason for Request. The proposed gross density of the project will be 13.89 units per acre, and the area in which the development is proposed is guided for Urban Medium Density Residential at a density of 4.5-7 units per acre. The City’s Urban High Density Land Use category allows for a density of 7.5-15 units per acre, and so the applicant has proposed amending the land use category of a portion of the subject property to Urban High Density. Current Land Use Guidance. The subject parcel is currently guided for Medium Density Residential on the northern portion of the parcel and Commercial on the southern portion of the parcel. The area of the subject parcel that is guided for Urban Medium Density Residential is 28.73 acres, and so provided an approximate 15% of this area was taken out to determine net density, approximately 170 units could go in this area using the maximum of 7 units per acre allowed within this land use guidance. The following uses are allowed within the Urban Medium Density Residential zoning district:  Single-family detached dwelling (permitted)  Two-family dwelling (permitted)  Single-family attached dwelling (permitted)  Multi-family dwelling (conditional)  Secondary dwelling (conditional)  Manufactured home park (conditional)  Group home (permitted)  Group residential facility (conditional)  Congregate housing (conditional)  Semi-transient accommodations (conditional)  Day care center (conditional)  Schools, public, and private (conditional)  Wayside stands (permitted)  Parks and open spaces (permitted)  Broadcasting or communication facility (conditional) The following accessory uses are also allowed:  Home occupation (permitted)  Bed and breakfast (conditional)  Family day care (permitted)  Group family day care (conditional)  Temporary sales (permitted)  Other structures typically incidental and clearly subordinate to permitted uses The proposed land use (Urban High Density Residential) and rezoning would allow the following uses:  Single-family detached dwelling (permitted)  Two-family dwelling (permitted)  Single-family attached dwelling (permitted)  Multi-family dwelling (permitted)  Secondary dwelling (conditional)  Group home (permitted)  Group residential facility (conditional)  Halfway house (conditional)  Congregate housing (conditional)  Semi-transient accommodations (conditional)  Community services (conditional)  Day care center (conditional)  Schools, public, and private (conditional)  Office (conditional)  Funeral home (conditional)  Personal services (conditional)  Nursing and personal care (conditional)  Neighborhood convenience store (conditional)  Wayside stands (permitted)  Parks and open spaces (permitted)  Broadcasting or communication facility (conditional) The following accessory uses are also allowed:  Home occupation (permitted)  Bed and breakfast (conditional)  Family day care (permitted)  Group family day care (conditional)  Parking facility (conditional)  Temporary sales (permitted)  Other structures typically incidental and clearly subordinate to permitted uses Comprehensive Plan Amendment Requirements by the Metropolitan Council (Met Council). Before submitting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment request to the Met Council for approval, a City must first submit for review by the Planning Commission, obtain local governing body authorization for the amendment to be submitted for Metropolitan Council review, and have adjacent governmental units, affected special districts, and affected school districts review. After receipt of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request by the Met Council, they have 15 days to review for completeness and 60 days to approve or deny and may extend this period to an additional 60 days if needed and beyond 120 days if agreed to by the local government. Adjacent Review. The application was sent out for adjacent review on August 30, 2017. Three responses have been received thus far, all stating that they don’t have any comments. The review period ends October 29, 2017. Required Sewered Housing. The Metropolitan Council Sewer Allocation Forecasts requires 3,721 sewered households by 2040. Currently, there are 2,401 units within the City that have been platted or at least have received some sort of development entitlement. Therefore, 1,584 more sewered units are required by 2040 according to this data. Of these sewered units, 1,220 would be in the areas planned for sewered development south of 10th Street. Current Areas Planned For High Density. There are currently only three areas within the City planned for High Density housing. Two are within current developments, the Inwood (31.06 acres) and Boulder Ponds (2.98 acres) developments, and the third area is within the Stage 2 area of the Sewered Staging Plan (118.94 acres). It should be noted, however, that the third high density area would require a number of properties to develop before sewer can be extended to this area. Currently Density within MUSA. The Metropolitan Council requires an average of three units per acre for areas within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Currently, it is estimated that with the addition of The Royal Golf Club at Lake Elmo, that the current average density in the MUSA, only taking in to account developments that now have development rights, is approximately 2.1 units per acre. Resident Concerns Prior to Public Hearing Notice. The following provides a summary of comments received by Staff regarding the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and proposed development:  The proposed density is almost double what the land is currently planned for and it is at the high end of the Urban High Density land use density.  Nearby residents bought property with the knowledge that adjacent parcels were guided for Urban Medium Density, not Urban High Density and would not have purchased such property with knowledge that there would be a high density development adjacent to their property.  The price point of the studios ($1,000 per month) could attract younger people, causing drugs, drinking and driving, and safety issues.  Increased use of 5th Street.  Concern of increased foot traffic in surrounding neighborhoods.  Concern of the apartment building becoming Section 8 housing.  Expression of support for the project as well as the applicant. Applicant has a national presence and reputation and builds high quality projects. Possibility to spur higher quality commercial and retail development. Zoning Map Amendment. If the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is approved and the Applicant applies for Preliminary Plat and PUD Plans, a Zoning Map Amendment will be required to rezone the applicable parcel from Rural Development Transitional to Urban High Density Residential. Recommended Findings. Staff recommends the following findings: 1. That the Applicant has submitted a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with the procedures as established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department and Lake Elmo Planning Commission; and 2. That the request is to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan: a. On page III-11, updating Table 3-B to reflect proposed increased acreage of Urban High Density Residential and decreased acreage of Urban High Density Residential. b. Updating Map 3-3 – the planned land use map. 3. That the proposed expansion of the MUSA will not negatively impact the City’s average MUSA density as required by the Metropolitan Council. 4. That the proposed amendments are consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Recommended Conditions of Approval. Staff recommends the following conditions of approval. 1. Submission of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Metropolitan Council and the receipt of formal notification from the Metropolitan Council that its review has been completed and approved. 2. That the Applicant obtain Preliminary Plat approval from the City for the proposed development based on the proposed Concept Plan as approved by Resolution 2017-___. FISCAL IMPACT: There would be no fiscal impact to the City at this time, as the developer would be required to pay for any amendments needed to accommodate the increase in REC units. Concept Plan approval does not afford the applicant development rights. When the property develops, it will have urban services and will pay sewer and water connection charges, building permit fees and the like. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed PUD Concept Plan with the recommended conditions of approval. “Motion to recommend approval of the PUD Concept Plan as requested by Continental 419 Fund LLC for PID# 34.029.21.43.0003 with recommended conditions of approval.” Additionally, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of an amendment to the Land Use Plan of the Comprehensive Plan, re-guiding a portion ofPID# 34.029.21.43.0003 from Urban Medium Density Residential to Urban High Density Residential as requested by Continental 419 Fund LLC subject to recommended condition of approval. “Motion to recommend approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment re-guiding a portion ofPID# 34.029.21.43.0003 from Urban Medium Density Residential to Urban High Density Residential as requested by Continental 419 Fund LLC subject to recommended condition of approval.” ATTACHMENTS:  Application materials  Engineer review memo dated September 7, 2017  Meeting notes from neighborhood meeting held on August 2, 2017  MNDOT letter