Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-26-84 PZMDecember 7, 1984 To: Planning Commission Members From: Pat Klaers, City Administrator For lack of agenda items, the December loth Planning Commission meeting has been cancelled. Also, the next scheduled meeting will fall on December 24th, and this meeting too has been cancelled. The Planning Commission will meet on January 14th, 1985. I have enclosed the Commission meeting. you would like made office. Happy Holidays !!! draft minutes from the November 26, 1984 Planning If there are any changes to these minutes that before the next meeting, please call the City December 7, 1984 To: Planning Commission Members From: Pat Klaers, City Administrator For lack of agenda items, the December 10th Planning Commission meeting has been cancelled. Also, the next scheduled meeting will fall on December 24th, and this meeting too has been cancelled. The Planning Commission will meet on January 14th, 1985. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 1984 Chairwoman Prince called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Dreher, Graves, Kuettner (arrived 7:25), Lundquist, Lyall, Michels, Moe (arrived 7:10), Nazarian, Administrator Klaers, City Planner Chelseth. Absent: Gifford, Schiltz. 1. Minutes: October 22, 1984 M/S/P Dreher/Michels - To approve the minutes of the October 22, 1984 Planning Commission meeting as presented. (Motion carried 7-0) Lundquist commented that he thought the minutes were too lengthly. When possible, every effort will be made to shorten these minutes. 2. I-94 Corridor: Future land use plan - Discussion and presentation by City Planner, Rob Chelseth. The Commission discussed the City Planner's memo of November 26, 1984 (which is a part of these minutes). The memo discusses changes to the Comprehensive Plan. Basically, we are proposing to amend the parts of the Comprehensive Plan that deal with Commercial/Industrial, Goals and Development and Highway Commercial Land Use. Referring to page 3 of his memo, (#6) Interstate Corridor Overlay District, Rob described an overlay district as being a district where all of the zoning that presently exists stays in place, and does not change. An overlay district lays over that existing zoning. Thereafter, land that is in this overlay district is subject to both the existing zoning conditions and the zoning conditions required in the overlay district. The reasons overlay districts are used is because there are unique conditions in the area that, in addition to the standard zoning and land use management requirements, the City may want to exercise special considerations (which are listed in the memo). Rob reviewed the 14 items listed under Minimum District Requirements - Interim Uses. He elaborated on #2 "No sewer discharge exceeding one SAC charge unit". Rob stated that this standard, more than any, will probably be the thing that determines how much and how intense land use can develop along this corridor. The term SAC means "sewer availabilty charge" and is utilizied by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission in that it is the charge paid by communities and calculated by these communities to be paid to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission when there is sewer service available. However, we are not concerned with that aspect. We are using it as a means of measuring the intensity of development we wish to allow along the I-94 corridor. Rob further referred to another handout which shows a series of different types of land uses, and tells for that use - given a certain size - how many SAC units the Metropolitan Council considers that use at the size listed to generate. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 11-26-84 PAGE 2 According to the Metropolitan Council, a SAC unit translates into about 274 gallons of sewage generated per day. It is the equivalent of a standard single family home. The Planner, Engineer and Administrator will review the SAC units for various commercial, public and institutional facilities. The question is, should this remain at one SAC unit per ten acres, or should it be changed. Rob reminded the Commission that the sole purpose alleviate a hardship, unique to the property over owner has no control. It is an often misused way the City Codes, and a new development should have variance. of a variance is to which the property of getting around no need for a Michels stated that although the Commission has not decided that one SAC unit will be the limit for ten acres, is the Commission going thru another exercise in futility because none of this is ever going to happen. For example, a 7000 square foot warehouse put on a ten acre lot (440,000 square feet) would mean that 7000 square feet would be under roof which is roughly two percent of the total land volume. Is it feasible to even think about doing something like that. We have to be somewhat realistic - we have to be restrictive, yet somewhat realistic. Maybe we should allow 3 SAC units so a 21,000 square foot building could be constructed. If we are not realistic, we will go thru a lot of effort, hold public hearings, etc., and the land will never be used because it is too restrictive. Consensus of the Commission is to look at the possibility of increasing the SAC units allowed on ten acres to at least three and possibly four or five. Consensus of the Commission is that the new City Council respond to this proposal. Dreher asked that the allowable height of buildings (in Section 32) be reviewed. As it stands now, the allowable height is thirty-five feet (approximately 4 stories), and we may want to increase that. 3. Public Hearing: Ordinance 7960 allowing nominal 10 acre parcel subdivisions in the Rural Residentiaal (RR) zone. Pursuant to published notice, this public hearing was opened at 7:55 p.m. in the City Council chambers. The Commission reviewed Ordinance 7960 which will allow nominal ten acre subdivisions in the RR zone. There was no residents present to offer comments for or against this proposed ordinance and the public hearing was closed at 7:57 p.m. The Commission has discussed this issue at several meetings, including its 5-29-84 meeting at which time they recommended to the City Council to amend the existing code to allow nominal ten acre subdivisions in the RR zone. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 11-26-84 PAGE 3 M/S/P Nazarian/Graves - To recommend to the City Council adopting ordinance 7960 amending the Lake Elmo City Code to allow nominal 10 acre subdivisions in the RR zone. (Motion carried 9-0). 4. Crombie simple lot subdivision at 8120 DeMontreville Trail North. The Commission reviewed the application and recommendations from the City Engineer. Nazarian asked if there were restrictions on the number of simple lot subdivisions that could be granted to an applicant. The Administrator responded that there were no such restrictions. As there were no variances requested with this application, and after a brief discussion the following action was taken. M/S/P Michels/Lyall - To recommend to the City Council approval of a simple lot subdivision for Brian Crombie at 8120 DeMontreville Trail North, contingent upon applicant complying with the recommendations of. the City Engineer (1) When the ponding area is developed from Crombie Estates 2nd Addition, that additional capacity is provided for this simple lot subdivision; (2) Revising the certificate of survey to show the locations of the existing house, driveway, well and septic system on Parcel A so that the setbacks on Parcel B1 can be checked prior to final approval by the Council; (3) The City obtains quit claim deeds for CSAH 13 right-of-way (33 feet) for Parcels A, B1 and B2; (4) Obtaining $175 park donation fee. (Motion carried 9-0). 5. January, 1985 Planning Commission Appointments/Vacancies Prince suggested that those Commissioner's whose terms are expiring (Dreher, Gifford and Michels) should indicate whether or not they desire to be reappointed. Dreher and Michels both wish to be reappointed. Prince suggested that Gifford ask the City Council to grant her a leave of absence for her next semester of school (which will include a Monday evening class). The Commission acknowledged that Gifford has made a real effort to attend all of the meetings while serving on this Commission while also attending law school with evening classes. As the policy now reads for length of time on a Commission, no Commissioner shall serve more than two consecutive three year terms unless the average years of service for all the Commission members is less than four years. The Commission would like the City believes that it takes a good deal City and its policies, and prefers served more than two terms because acquired Council to review this policy as it of time to become familiar with the not to lose the members that have of the knowledge they have 6. Discussion on size of accessory structures The Commission reviewed the revised ordinance from Washington County on sizes of accessory structures, and the memo from the Building Official. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 11-26-84 PAGE 4 M/S/P Michels/Graves - To recommend to the City Council that the Lake Elmo Municipal Code be amended to conform to the standards set by the State of Minnesota and Washington County regarding the size of accessory structures. (Motion carried 9-0) 7. Review of 1984 Work Plan The Commission reviewed the work plan have been Commission will ask the Plan 8. Other the 1984 Work Plan. As most of the items in addressed, or are just update items, the City Council for direction for its 1985 Work A. Election Recount Results The Administrator explained the recount procedure and City election to the Commission. B. Annual Planning Institute results of the The date of the Annual Planning Institute has been changed to Wednesday, December 5th. The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. f I f November 21, 1984 To: Planning Commission Members From: Pat Klaers, City Administrator Subject: Agenda Memo for November 26, 1984 Meeting ********************************************************************* PLEASE NOTE THAT THE STARTING TIME FOR THIS 11-26-84 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IS 7:00 P.M. INSTEAD OF THE 7:30 TIME THAT HAS BEEN USED DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS. AS REQUESTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THIS PAST SUMMER, WE WILL CONTINUE TO HOLD THE PLANNING COMMISSSION MEETINGS AT 7:00 P.M. DURING THE WINTER MONTHS UNTIL DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME BEGINS NEXT SPRING. ********************************************************************* 1. Minutes: Attached for your consideration are the minutes from the October 22, 1984 Planning Commission meeting. 2. I-94 Corridor Future Land Use Plan: The Planning Commission had a very good discussion on this topic at its last meeting so the Commission should closely review these minutes. Attached for your information is a cover sheet from the City Planner, Rob Chelseth, two pages for a proposed Comp Plan change, and two pages for a proposed zoning code change. I believe that the proposal being presented at this meeting is a very sound plan and meets all of the objectives of the Planning Commission for controlling development along the I-94 corridor. What is being proposed is the creation of an Interstate Overlay District, very similar to what is existing in the City Code with the Shoreland and Flood Plain Districts. Within this Overlay District, there are proposed performance standards for future development that will take place without sewer being available (east of Section 32) and with sewer being available (within Section 32). All proposed development will have to select the appropriate zoning district that is currently existing in our City Code, and then meet all of those requirements, plus the requirements imposed by the Overlay District and other requirements listed in the City Code for such items as landscaping, screening, lighting, exterior storage, etc. After this plan is discussed (and hopefully recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at a future meeting) a map will have to be drafted and attached to these documents as guidelines for the Interstate Corridor Overlay District. This map will only be needed for the zoning ordinance, and not for the Comp Plan. This proposal has been sent to the City Engineer, Larry Bohrer for his review and I anticipate having comments from him available at the next Planning Commission meeting. AGENDA MEMO FOR 11-16-84 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PAGE 2 A key factor in the proposed Overlay District is item #6D2, which is a performance standard for development without sewer being available. This standard limits the sewer discharge to one sac unit. This condition may be too restrictive as the minimum lot size is proposed to be ten acres, and one sac unit is the typical discharge for a single family residential unit. This performance standard may have to be revised to something on the order of one sac unit per acre or acre and one-half. Additionally, we may have to set up some definitions for a sac unit. Also, you should note that on page 4 under the performance standards listed in E for development of having sewer available, there are references to water extensions and water systems. The fact is that without a waste -to -energy plant being located in Section 32, no central water system may be built in the area. Therefore, much of the development in Section 32 may have to be responsible for supplying their own water. All in all, I feel that the proposed Comp Plan changes and zoning code amendment are very sound proposals and meet with the overall objectives of the Planning Commission. This topic most certainly will not be able to be completed at this meeting as once a consensus is reached by the Planning Commission, we will then hold a public hearing and informally advise the City Council of the intentions of the Planning Commission. I look forward to an interesting discussion with Rob and the Planning Commission. Rob is planning to attend this meeting at 7:00 to participate in this discussion. 3. Public Hearing for proposed Ordinance 7960 allowing nominal ten acre subdivisions in the RR zone. Attached for your information is proposed Ordinance 7960, and a section from the Planning Commission minutes of 5-29-84 where this topic was discussed. As you may recall, this topic was discussed by the Planning Commission in relationship to the Danielson large lot subdivision. A few of the four lots that Mrs. Danielson proposed to subdivide did not quite meet the ten acre requirement because of right-of-way requirements being donated to the City. The Planning Commission then reviewed the history of nominal 10's and made the recommendation to the City Council to allow ten acre lot subdivisions inclusive of the right-of-way requirements based on the seven reason listed. The City Council, after approving the Danielson large lot subdivision, accepted the Planning Commission's recommendation and voted to adopt the attached ordinance. However, a public hearing is required for an amendment to the zoning code and we are now going thru this public hearing process. This is somewhat of a formality as both the Planning Commission and City Council have passed motions recommending the proposed ordinance, so the staff feels there will be very little problem and discussion from both the City Council and Planning Commission on this issue. AGENDA MEMO FOR i1-16-84 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PAGE 01 Basically, all that is being added to the Code is the last sentence under #6 in Ordinance 7960. This is the identical statement which allows nominal 40 acre developments in the AG zone. 4. Crombie Simple Lot Subdivision at 8120 DeMontreville Trail North. Mr. and Mrs. Crombie have applied for a second simple lot subdivision at 8120 DeMontreville Trail North. You may recall that this past March, the Planning Commission reviewed the subdivision shown on the attached certificate of survey as Parcel A. The Planning Commission had very few problems with this application and recommended approval to the City Council contingent upon the Engineer's recommendation that when the Crombie Estates 2nd Addition is developed, the ponding area provided includes a capacity for this simple lot subdivision. Attached for your information is the application, legal description and certificate of survey. This application is very similar to the previous one last March as all code requirements are met and no variances are required. The DNR had absolutely no comment on this application as it is quite a distance from Lake DeMontreville and across a road from this lake. Likewise, the City Council accepted the Planning Commission's recommendation and approved this simple lot subdivision. The Crombie's are proposing to subdivide Parcel B1, which has 1.98 acres excluding right-of-way on the east side of their existing house. This parcel is between their house and the lot that was subdivided earlier this year. At this time, the staff has no problems with this application and recommends approval, contingent upon the Engineer's recommendations and obtaining $175 cash donation for park activities. The section of the Code which relates to simple lot subdivisions are 401.04 OA on page 400-5 and 401.26 OA on page 400-16. I anticipate that a handout from the City Engineer will be available for distribution at the Planning Commission meeting on 11-26-84. Also, by this time we may have received comments from the DNR which are expected to be very minimal. 5. January, 1985 Planning Commission Appointments/Vacancies. After 1984, three Planning Commission members terms of office will expire. These three positions will be up for either reappointment, or else the positions will be vacant. These three individuals are: Vicki Gifford, Howard Michels and Robert Dreher. The staff will be looking for input as to the intentions of these three individuals and other comments from the Planning Commission on this topic. 6. Accessory Structure Size Requirements. Recently, the City Council approved an accessory structure variance for Don Durand to construct an accessory structure of 1200 square feet which is in excess of the 1000 square feet code requirement. AGENDA MEMO FOR 11-16-84 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PAGE 4 I mentioned to the Council that the Planning Commission was interested in this topic and that we will again be addressing this issue. Attached for your information is the newly revised Washington County Code on sizes of accessory structures, and a memo from the Building Official, James McNamara. You should note that it is State Law that a garage which houses a motor vehicle cannot exceed 1000 square feet. However, the Commission should be considering the size of the parcel of land, the zoning district, and the use of the land and accessory structure in reviewing whether or not any changes are needed in our maximum size of accessory structures. Also attached is the Lake Elmo Code pages which relate to accessory structures. On small parcels of R1 land (under 2 acres), I do not believe that any changes should be made in the 1000 square footage maximum. However, on R1 zoned land that has between 5 and 10 acres of land, we may want to consider expanding the maximum square footage, or the number of accessory structures. As the Code indicates, there is no requirement on the number or size of accessory structures on large agricultural zoned property. We may also want to look at accessory structures in other zones besides Residential and Agricultural; le; Commercial and Industrial. I have no strong feelings on this part of the code dealing with accessory structures, but the Building Official's memo has some opinions on retaining and changing part of our existing code. The Council obviously feels the code is too restrictive on large pieces of residential land as they gave Mr. Durand, who owns in excess of five acres in the R1 zone, an accessory size variance. 7. 1984 Work Plan. Attached for your information is the approved 1984 Work Plan. I have this item on the agenda simply for your review and update and to receive any comments from the Planning Commission. No further summary of the status of this Work Plan is offered below, but I will be prepared to provide a verbal update as desired at the meeting. 8. Other This item is on the agenda simply for any Commission member to raise any topic of interest. OTHER INFORMATION ********************************************************************* 1. Attached for your information are the two most recent City Newsletters dated October 23, 1984 and November 13, 1984. These two Newsletters should keep the Planning Commission up-to-date on recent City Council activities. 2. The staff has registered Fred Nazarian, Howard Michels, Carol Kuettner and Nancy Prince for the Annual Planning Institute that will take place in St. Paul. There has been one very important change in AGENDA MEMO FOR 11-16-84 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PAGE 5 this Conference. This change relates to the date of the Workshop/Conference. The brochure that was distributed indicated that the conference would take place on Friday, November 30th, but I have been informed by Government Training Services that this conference has been completely filled. They are offering a second conference in St. Paul, at the same location, on Wednesday, December 5th. I indicated to Government Training Center that these individuals will notify me at the Planning Commission meeting on Monday if they can still attend this workshop and that I would call them on Tuesday, 11-27-84 to give them a final number of Lake Elmo individuals that will be attending this Wednesday, December 5th conference. If any of the four registered Planning Commission members cannot attend this Wednesday, 12-5 conference, you most definitely should make me aware of that fact. Also, if this is the case with some of the four registered Planning Commission members, other members may be able to attend this conference in your place. 3. For anyone that has not been informed of the local City Council election results, they are as follows: Mayor: Maynard Eder 1314 David Morgan 1360 City Council: Rosemary Armstrong 1176 Arlyn Christ 1010 Laura Fraser 902 Fred Nazarian 783 John Schiltz 737 Roy Rossow 313 Ronald Smith 143 4. The City Council will once again be putting on a Christmas Party for all of the volunteers that serve the City on various commissions and other programs and activities. This Christmas Party will be taking place in the City Council chambers on Friday, December 14th beginning at 4:00 p.m. and running until approximately 6:30 p.m. All Planning Commision members and their spouses are cordially invited to attend this Christmas party. This is always a good opportunity for commission members to meet and mix with other City volunteers and the Council members. 5. Wish to inform the Planning Commission members that the Minnesota Commissioner of Health has accepted the transfer of ownership and license of the St. Croix Valley EMS to Lakeview Memorial Hospital. You may recall that Lakeview was attempting to obtain approval this past summer to operate a second ambulance service in the area, but that this request was rejected by the Department of Health. Lakeview has now obtained the St. Croix Valley EMS and will be operating this service shortly. Therefore, Lakeview Hospital has obtained the ambulance service, but there will be only one service available in the area. A copy of the Commissioner of Health's order is attached for your informaion. AGENDA MEMO FOR 11-16-84 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PAGE 6 6. Attached for your information is an article from the League of Minnesota Cities magazine which discusses the IISAC Computer Information System. Lake Elmo is a member of this group, and has beeril using the utility billing program for over two years and will be adding the fund accounting and payroll program shortly. Marilyn Banister has attended a number of classes to help implement these systems. 7. Update on recent City Council action. A. The City Council has adopted the water meter card policy for the implementation of this new system. B. The City Council approved the existing snowplowing routes and policy for the City of Lake Elmo. C. The City Council approved the VBWD request to continue pumping from Lake Jane to City Park Pond after the 11-15-84 deadline included in the petition. This additional pumping is required because of the enormous amount of rain the area received in October (you should note that November is currently one of the driest months in history). D. The City Council adopted a motion indicating its intention to approve the Dickhausen/Loetscher simple lot subdivision and lot size zoning code variance at 3063 Jamley Avenue. The applicants will be back before the City Council for official adoption of the resolution indicating this approval once the two separate wells have been installed. E. The City Council approved water rate increases for the municipal water system. These rates will be going from sixty cents per 1000 gallons to ninety cents per 1000 gallons with the minimum charge and base rate remaining the same. F. The City Council adopted ordinance 7964 which amends the Surface Water Ordinance. This ordinance makes permanent the boating restrictions that were adopted by the Council on June 19, 1984 in R84-44 which limits boating activities on all lakes in the tri-lakes area. However, one change was made in the ordinance in which only boating activities on Lake Jane, when that lake exceeds level 924, are limited. The Council deleted all limitations on boating activities on Lakes DeMontreville and Olson. G. The City Council formally accepted a small DNR grant for trail grooming services in Sunfish Park. The City requrested approximately $1500, but received only $225. This is not a great sum of money, but every little bit helps and we are now back into the DNR grant system. This should make approval of future grants much easier. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, INC. 529 South Seventh Street Suite535 Mnir totiln I ;, MN Itt5/115 612332/1196 TO: Lake Elmo Planning Commission FROM: Rob Cheiseth, City Planner DATE: November 26, 1984 SUBJECT: Land Use Plans and Zoning for I-94 Corridor Pursuant to the Planning Commission's suggestions during our last "I.94 meeting", the following Comprehensive Plan amendments and proposed interstate corridor district for the zoning ordinance have been drafted. Comprehensive Plan Amendments Basically these changes describe the creation of two areas along the I-94 corridor. The Section 32-33 area is identified as Lake Elmo's principal area for "long term" urban commercial/industrial developments requiring public sewer/water services. The remaining portions of the corridor (from eastern Section 33 east to County Road 15) are identified as suitable for "interim" commercial and light industrial uses subject to a number of performance standards. These standards are designed to insure development is kept at low densities consistent with rural areas where urban services will not soon be made available. Zoning Code After considering several alternative means of managing development in the 1-94 corridor, a zoning overlay district was selected based upon several considerations. First, because several different types of land use activities may be considered for parts of the, corridor (high density residential, highway commercial, office, light industrial), it would be difficult to properly manage such diverse development using just two or three special corridor zones. Second, within each use category, individual uses may or may not be suitable for approval, depending upon their needs and impacts. For example, office buildings may or may not be permitted, depending upon whether or not the volume of sanitary wastes generated can be handled through an on -site septic system, traffic volumes can be managed with existing roads, etc. 'Consequently, an Interstate Corridor Overlay District is proposed for the Interstate 94 area. This district would function in the same manner as the other overlay districts in the Code (Flood Plain, Shoreland, etc.). In summary, the overlay district would be adopted covering all land in the corridor. Subsequently, when land owners seek zoning changes (commercial, industrial, etc.) they can propose the most appropriate zone based upon the planned use. This rezoning may then be approved, once it is clear that the proposed development conforms to both the Comprehensive Plan, and to the performance standards set forth in the Interstate Corridor Overlay District. The following district would be added to the zoning code under Section 301,070 E 16) Interstate Corridor Overlay District. (6) Interstate Corridor Overlay District The Interstate Corridor Overlay District shall provide special requirements and performance standards that shall be imposed in conjunction with zoning districts adopted for land located in the Interstate Highway Corridor. The purpose of this district is to manage changes in land use that may occur along the interstate corridor as a result of improved highway access and ,frontage road development. To accomplish this objective, this overlay district sets forth two sets of performance standards which must be met by all proposed uses in the corridor, a. Permitted Uses and Structures. (1) all uses permitted in the underlying zoning district. b. Accessory Uses and Structures. -(1) all accessory uses permitted in the underlying zoning district. c. Conditional Uses, (1) all conditional uses permitted in the underlying zoning district. d, Minimum District Requirements -Interim Uses. Uses not served by public sewer and water that are not intensive (urban) land uses, and demand negligible increases in public services, may be approved as "interim uses", These uses shall be subject to the following minimum performance standards. --T1) mrnimum lot size of ten (I01 acres. (2) no sewer discharge exceeding one SAC charge unit. (3) no public utility service is required on the part of the City, (4) all projected traffic generated by the use can be accomodated with existing streets, requiring no improvements at the cost of the City or the public. (5) an adequate supply of off-street parking and off-street loading space shall be provided. (6) the use will require no additional public saftey services or needs. (7) no noise abatement problems shall exist that could potentially require public corrective action. (8) the proposed land use(s) will be compatible both in terms of internal site plans, and with regard to adjacent land uses. (9) where potential land use compatibility problems exist, site plans shall be designed to eliminate such conflicts through redesign or through the incorporation of features that mitigate the impacts of the conflicts. (10) land use plans provide for future development or redevelopment at such time that public water and sewer services are provided. (11) the site pldn shall pron,idd for adequate drainage systems which do not pose pollution problems, (12) the use(s) maintain standards of architectural design and building quality consistent with the Uniform Building Code and all other applicable City codes. (13) the proposed use is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. (14) the proposed use will not create fiscal problems for the City, or adversely impact the health, safety or welfare of the community, 3 9• e, Mininun District ROgti1r menmts l on Usesry1iia�c ur arl`an'r(n iiitur`e arclrequire central water and sewer service, as well as other major public services, shall be classified as "long-term uses", These uses shall he subject to the following minimum performance standards. (1) public sewer and water extensions, provided at the user's expense. (2) if projected traffic generated by the proposed use exceeds the capacity of existing streets, additional improvements shall be provided at the expense of the land developer. (3) all necessary noise abatement improvements will be provided at no cost to the City. (4) an adequate supply of off-street parking and off-street loading space shall be provided. (5) the proposed land use(s) will be compatible both in terms of internal site plans, and with regard to adjacent land uses. (6) where potential land use compatibility problems exist, site plans shall be designed to eliminate such conflicts through redesign or through the incorporation of features that mitigate the impact of the conflicts. (7) the site plan shall provide for adequate drainage systems which do not pose pollution problems. (8) the use(s) shall maintain standards of architectural design and building quality consistent with the Uniform Building Code and all other applicable City codes. (9) the proposed use is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. (10) the proposed use will not create fiscal problems for the City, or adversely impact the health, safety or welfare of the community. f. Minimum District Requirements -All Uses. The following minimum requirements shall be observed in the overlay district, subject to additional requirements,, exceptions and modifications( set forth in this Code. (1) uses permitted in the underlying zoning district shall be subject to the lot•area and setback requirements specified in the applicable district. (2) lot area, setback, building requirements may be increased under the overlay district to provide sound site planning and eliminate potential conflicts between land uses. Building Type and Construction No galvanized or unfinished steel, galvalum or unfinished aluminum buildings (walls or roofs), except those specifically intended to have a corrosive design finish, such as corten steel, shall be permitted. Any exposed metal or fiberglass finish on all buildings shalllbe limited to fifty (50) percent of any one wall. Exterior building finishes shall consist of materials comparable in grade and quality to the following: (1 brick (2 natural `stone (3 decorative concrete block (4 cast in place concrete or precast concrete panels (5 wood, provided the surfaces are finished for exterior use and wood of proven exterior durability is used such as cedar, redwood, etc. (6) Curtain wall panels of steel, fiberglass and aluminum (nonstructural, nonload bearing), provided such panels are factory fabricated and finished with a durable nonfade surface with fasteners of a corrosion resistant design. (7) glass curtain wall panels (8) stucco i Page 90; GOAL AND POLICY STATEMENTS Commercial -Industrial Existing commercial and industrial development in Lake Elmo is centered around the "old village" in eastern Lake Elrno. Pressures for additional commercial uses have occurred near or adjacent to Lake Elmo's three major highway corridors; Interstate 94, Highway 5, and Highway 36, Although there will continue to be a need for industries and commercial operations which serve the community, large scale intensive commercial -industrial uses are generally unsuited for rural areas with limited municipal services. Consequently, all rrgposed.- commercial and industrial uses that require public utilities and services will be guided to locate within Section 32 and western Section 33, where urban services currently exist or are planned f'or installation timed with development. This area will receive the major thrust of public investment in facilities and services, and it should be the main focus for "long term' commercial sand industrial land use. Restricted amounts of limited commercial and light industrial development are planned for the land located within the Fier -slate 94 corridor. Land uses in this area will be restricted to highway oriented businesses requiring a highway frontage road location. Development - in this area will be kept at very low densities, and restricted to uses that do not demand immediate urban facilities and services. Such uses will be termed "interim uses" and designed in accordance with performance standards that both insure they will not have a negative impact on the City, and can be upgraded at such time that public services become available. Goals for Commercial -Industrial Development * To minimize conflicts between commercial and/or industrial uses and surrounding rural development, such as agricultural and low -density residential. To insure that commercial and industrial projects are designed in a manner that is functional, safe and esthetically pleasing. To provide residents with the best possible access to the supply of necessary goods and services. To concentrate additional long-term commercial and industrial development within the existing town center and in Sections 32-33. To permit interSrn light commercial and industrial development that will not require the premature extension of public services along the Interstate 94 corridor, Policies for Commercial -Industrial Development Commercial and industrial development roust be located in areas designated for such development. Commercial and industrial development along arterial highways will be concentrated in designated areas along major thoroughfares served by frontage roads. This development will emphasize highway -oriented business, and will be located near or adjacent to expanding urban areas that will eventually provide a full range of urban facilities and services. Commercial and industrial proposals must contain plans indicating how the uses will be or may eventually be, served by all required public services (including sewere, water, roads, and so forth). Commercial industrial uses must be properly landscaped and screened with vegetative or other buffers to minimize conflicts with adjacent land uses. Only "clean", non-polluting industrial uses will be allowed where major public utilities are unavailable to handle toxic or large quantities of wastes. Page 94; GOAL AND POLICY STATEMENTS: 1990 Future Land Use Plan, and Map Highway Commercial - This category is established to permit those types of businesses that require accessibility to major highways in order to successfully function. To prevent unmanageable strip development, these areas should be limited to businesses that absolutely require highway accessibility. In addition to highway commercial uses, other compatible uses may be mixed into these developments. Particular emphasis should be placed on locating uses in this district which are compatible with the sights, odors and noise associated with major highways. Areas planned for highway commercial development should be at least ten acres in size, and designed with service roads and adequate screening from surrounding land uses. The Future Land Use Plan calls for highway commercial development to occur on Interstate 94 in the areas near and adjacent to interchanges at County Roads 13 and 19. This area is adjacent to land planned for urbanization in Sections 32 and 33 ,and is thus the logical next phase for expanded commercial/industrial development in the community. The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council" One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings and make recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions on these matters. Lake Elmo Ordinances require that certain documents and information be included in applications" The Planning Commission may postpone consideration of an application that is incomplete and may for other reasons postpone final action on an application. For each item, the Commission will receive reports prepared by the City Staff, open the hearing to the public, and discuss and act on the application. If you are aware of information that hasn't been discussed, please fill out a "Request to Appear Before the Planning Commission" slip; or, if you came late, raise your hand to be recognized. Comments that are pertinent are appreciated" H00 P.M. 7:45 P"M^ AGENDA LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Convenes l. MinutesS October 22, 1984 2^ I-94 Corridor: Future land use plan discussion and presentation by City Planner, Rob Che}seth 3" P�bli��H���iOg : Ordinance 7960 allowing nominal 10 acre parcel subdivisions in the Rural Residential (RR) zone Crombie Simple Lot Subdivision." 8120 Demontreville Trail North 5" January, 1985, Planning Commission Appointments/Vacancies 6. Discussion on size of accessary structures Review of 1984 Work Plan S. Other CITY OF LAKE AELMO City of Lake Elmo November 8, 1984 777-5510 3880 Laverne Avenue North / Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 To: Planning Commission Members From: Pat Klaers, City Administrator Subject: Planning Commission Meeting As you know, the meeting scheduled for November 12, 1984 has been cancelled as this is a legal holiday. The next scheduled meeting is November 26, 1984. The City Council approved the payment of registration fees to the Annual Planning institute for any Planning Commission member that wishes to attend. Please let me know by Thursday November 15th if you plan to attend this seminar.