Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Minutes; 11-27-17Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 11-27-17 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of November 27, 2017 Chairman Kreimer called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Williams, Kriemer, Lundquist, Emerson, Johnson Larson, & Hartley COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Dodson & Dorschner STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Prchal & City Administrator Handt Approve Agenda: M/S/P: Lundquist/Williams, move to approve the agenda as presented, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously Approve Minutes: November 13, 2017 M/S/P: Williams/Hartley, move to approve the November 13, 2017 minutes as amended, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Business Item – 2018 Planning Department Work Plan Prchal started his presentation regarding the 2018 Planning Department work plan. He went through the projects that have been completed and the ones that are in progress. There are some items that are listed as a priority, but they will coincide with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. There are a number of ongoing projects such as the CIP, escrows, code enforcement and records management. There are projects that need feedback from the Planning Commission. M/S/P: Williams/Larson, move to add a study into modifying the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan to include requiring and/or incentivizing affordable housing in sewered development as a priority level 2 on the 2018 work plan, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Handt stated that there is language in the Comprehensive Plan that is contrary to providing incentives for affordable housing. 2 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 11-27-17 Williams stated that with the Comprehensive Plan revision, it is something that can be looked at. Emerson thinks that will be diff icult to do. Hartley feels that affordable housing would be better dispersed throught the City vs. concentrated in one area. Larson feels that it should be development driven and if an opportunity arises, it should be considered. The public facilities Zoning Text Amendment can be removed as it was recently completed. Outdoor lighting had to do with street light locations and fixtures. There was some discussin about guiding RR and A parcels less than 20 acres in size to RE. It was determined that should go with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment so that the population could be balanced. Kreimer does not recall any discussion regarding the size of the parcel. His recollection was just introducing it back into the Zoning Code as it is no longer available as an option. There were 2 itmes completed in the other planning initiatives which can be removed. Hartley asked about electronic searchable versions of documents. Handt stated that the conversion process starts with a specific date and as time allows, you can work backwards. Handt stated that the best use of funds is to update the zoning code to electronic with the Comprehensive Plan update. M/S/P: Lundquist/Johnson, move to change the research/develop drone policy or ordinance to a priority 2, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Lundquist thinks that with the airport, it is important and could easily be researched by looking at Cities such as Bloomington, St. Paul, Eden Prairie, etc. Prchal stated he just went to a drone seminar at the County and he can reach out to them for some contacts. Kreimer asked about outdoor wood burning stoves. It was on work plan at one point and now it is gone. Handt stated that they have not received any complaints so it was probably removed. M/S/P: Lundquist/Williams, move to recommend the 2018 Planning Department work plan with amendments to the City Council, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Business Item – Zoning Text Amendment – Sign Regulations Prchal started his presentation regarding the sign regulations. Areas of concern are the area allowed for signs along the freeway and monument signs in developments. This would include the size and number allowed. A larger sign would be allowed at the main entrance and smaller ones at subsequent entrances. This amendment would also address subdivision signs direction signs within right of ways. Lighting was discussed, including the prohibition of LED lighting. 3 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 11-27-17 The Planning Commission feels that the expectation should be that if a sign permit i s issued, the sign should be completed within a year. Hartley asked why the City would care if it is an LED light. Prchal stated that if they do not have shielding, the lighting might be more bright. Hartley stated that the LE lighting would probably be preferable. Kriemer stated that he thinks the Noran Clinic has LED and it seems fine. Williams stated that the signs within center islands should also include the support structure being at least 5 feet from the curb. Emerson stated that the pylon signs should be increased to 150 square feet along I-94 to be competitive with Woodbury. M/S/P: Emerson/Lundquist, move to change the existing 100 square feet to 150 square feet within 50 feet of a property line along I-94, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Williams does not agree with the base being at least 75% of the width of the sign as that prevents having a pylon sign which would be appropriate along I-94. Williams would like to remove the size restriction of the base, but leave in the materials. M/S/P: Williams/Hartley, move to change the last sentence of (b) in notes to table 5-3 to read “The base shall be constructed of materials that are similar to those used on the building for which the sign is installed”, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Hartley/Johnson, move to delete the change listed in section 5 (h), Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Business Item – Zoning Test Amendment – Wind Power Ordinance Prchal started his presentation by stating that the old wind generator ordinance should be removed and replaced with the new version. One important point of the new ordinance is that the definition of what a wind mill is was changed. There was no real discussion about where they should be allowed. There was discussion if there should just be a 10 acre minimum or if it should be by zone. There were 10 items that the Planning Commission asked staff to specifically look at. There was diameter of rotor and height, proximity to wildlife, noise and vibration, fencing for security risk, safety standards, standards for specific certification, color and maintenance, removal and setbacks. The diameter of rotor proposed is 52 feet, with a blade length of 26. The hei ght was left the same at 125 feet. Roof mounted structures, the Commission is thinking there should be a limit of 6 feet higher than structure mounted to. These would be vertical 4 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 11-27-17 axis structures. To address the proximity to wildlife, right now the wind generators are not allowed in the Shoreland overlay district. They are supposed to be 1.25 times the structures height from that boundary. No vibration can be created that can be felt beyond the property line. Staff is not recommending fencing around the wind generator. Hartley stated that there should be feedback from the City attorney on that. Prchal stated that there are other safety measures such as anti-climbing systems that might work better than a fence which is why he decided not to include the fencing. Williams agrees with Commissioner Hartley that input from the City Attorney would be important. Prchal stated that the safety standards came from multiple sources. The Planning Commission can make them more or less stringent based on their preference. Johnson stated that they might want to add any manufacturer warranties or instructions as a requirement. Prchal is suggesting that the color be white or off-white. The removal and decommissioning standards come from the Public Utilities Commission. The Planning Commission does not feel that the Wind Generators have to be limited to an accessory structure, but could be considered as a primary structure. Handt is wondering if wind generators as a primary use are in the best interest of the City as they might not create much tax value to the city. Handt is not sure how they are taxed. Prchal will research what other communities do in regards to principle use vs. accessory use. Larson thinks there should be discussion about having wind generators in the outlots of developments as there is a lot of open land. M/S/P: Williams/Kreimer, move to have wind generators as a Conditional principle use, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Williams asked why it is limited to one mono pole system. It could be a large piece of property. Prchal stated that the old ordinance required them to be 1000 feet apart. Prchal stated that it is up to the Planning Commission on how many they would like to allow. Williams doesn’t feel they should be specifically limited but should be regulated by setbacks and such. One consideration might be the manufacturer’s suggestion of how far apart they should be. Handt stated that there are model ordinances that look at lot size, setbacks, etc. Handt thinks that it might be beneficial to look at those before holding the public hearing. Handt stated that if someone is looking to install a wind generator in the airport area, it would require FAA approval and the applicant would be responsible to get that approval. There was some discussion regarding engineering for safety standards. Handt stated that a general statement regarding safety would probably be sufficient as they might 5 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 11-27-17 change over time. Handt stated that there are standards either in the state building code or state statute and it would not need to be included in the ordinance. Handt stated that staff should look into how other Cities deal with some of these questions and it should come back to them. Kreimer is wondering about maintenance and if staff could look at model ordinances regarding that. City Council Updates – November 21, 2017 Meeting i) Lake Elmo Sod Farm Interim Use Permit - approved ii) Wyndham Village Subdivision Sketch Plan Review & CPA – tabled until January Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. December 11, 2017 2. MAC CEP Report 3. Comprehensive Plan Update Commission Concerns Lundquist would like a copy of the decision in regards to the appeals court regarding the Rossow property. Handt stated it was a 2-1 vote in favor of Rossow and having the City approve the plat. Handt stated that the City has 30 days to appeal. Meeting adjourned at 9:30 pm Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertman Planning Program Assistant