Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-9-85 PZMPPR V LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1985 Chairman Nazarian called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Present: Prince, Moe, Novak, Martens, Bucheck (arrived 7:38), Lundquist, Graves, City Administrator Overby, and City Planner Chelseth (arrived 7:45). Absent: Lyall, Schiltz, Lang. 1. Minutes - November 12, 1985 M/S/P Moe/Prince - to approve the minutes of the November 12, 1985 Planning Commission meeting as presented. (Motion carried 5-0-2<Abstain: Graves, Martens›). 2. Annual Planning Institute - Report by those who attended. Don Moe - The Planning Commission should be advised of any new changes in the state law that has to do with buildings or accessory buildings. Dan Novak - Access on a major thoroughfare is a problem that should not be permitted. "Spot" development will push sewer if there are any problems. City should not duplicate plans that has a tendency to loosen the rural character and this may be happening with regard to signs. Council and its Commission often times lack resolve in following issues. A major problem is not enforcing plans. Be careful in regulating people in their expression. You cannot unnecessarily burden fundamental rights. Make sure your ordinances are clear and everyone understands these rules. State has mandated that child care and handicapped institutions have the same rights as single families. Subdivision rules should be consistent with zoning regulations. If a poor design is permitted by our code you should have a paragraph in your code that allows you to negotiate a poor plan. No private streets should be allowed. To deny a subdivision or plat it has to be by the book. To deny a rezone it does not have to go by the book, but it can be rejected for subjective reasons. A comment was made at the meeting that if there is alot of rezoning done then something is wrong. A good comprehensive plan should be put together and it should be enforced. 3. County Road 19B The City Council has asked the Planning Commission to discuss the future land use and planning and development impacts. At the November 19th City Council meeting it was discussed if the City was interested in joining with the County on assessments to the property owners adjacent to the road right-of-ways. The Council could not see any benefit to the City to go along with this process. The other alternative would be for the County to do it LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1985 PAGE 2 on their own. The County would have to get permission from the City to work this process under existing State law. Prince - In regard to the 194 area, the Planning Commission had hoped that any commercial development would be around interchanges first. The commission would only be in favor of rezoning the area around the interchange if someone were to come in with a development at the interchange. Commission member Prince would be adverse to rezoning any other part of that area for any use other than what is currently there. Graves - Agrees with Commission member Prince that they should not undo any rezoning other than just around the intersection along the same line as we did on County 15 and 13. Tom Armstrong, 8291 15th St. N. - If you allow the County to assess, that is what they are asking for here, you give justification to the landowners for development because they have suddenly been assessed for a road and they have a legal and a moral right to use that. If they are not assessed for it, they got a free road and it does not put an economic hardship on them and have to develop it. This assessment will also set a precedent. Moe - For now he sees no benefit to the landowners. Lundquist - In our 5-year plan there is no provision for sewer. M/S/P Prince/Graves - to recommend to the City Council that they respond to the request from the County by saying that they prefer no assessments for County Road 19B because our comprehensive plan indicates that we do not see any future residential or commercial development in that area and do not see any available sewer in our plan. (Motion carried 8-0). 4. Tartan Park - Use of Maintenance Road for Park Entrance. Bucheck - This is right off of 20th and she was told that the gravel road would be what they will eventually use and didn't know if they were going to close the paved road, but they don't want people using it because it cuts through the golf course. They also feel it is dangerous because it is hilly and winding. Prince - This is an item for the City Engineer to investigate and report back with his comments. 5. Auto Unloading Facility in Oakdale It was brought to the attention of the Planning Commission that Oakdale has before them a concept plan from the Chicago and Northwestern Transportation Company for a "Railroad Auto Unloading Facility" which would be located south of Highway 5 and east of Highway 694, north of Stillwater Boulevard and west of County Road 13B. The site would include the Unloading Facility, along with some light industrial and office development proposed around the perimeter. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1985 PAGE 3 Tom Armstrong - This would be all the land north of the railroad tracks between Ideal over to 694 and then from the railroad tracks to Highway 5. Joe Raleigh has 57 acres, and Joe had suggested that Oakdale contact Armstrong to buy some land for ponding. If the site goes in and they need an area for ponding, Armstrong has 12 acres to the south that he would sell, but this was never discussed with him. They claimed the plans would observe the one percent rule as to rate and volume of water and have a total of 61 acre feet of storage. Armstrong was told that this was sufficient not only for the railroad site, but also would take care of some of the Menards runoff and actually leave Lake Elmo in a better condition than it is now. They have assessed the piece in Oakdale at $29,000 for sewer trunk. This is for the oversizing of the lift station that is down in Stillwater Blvd. and Ideal. The last thing he heard is that this facility was going into Rosemount where the City Council has already approved it on a 5-0 vote. 6. Membership openings in January, 1986. City Administrator Overby explained that according to our code there are two criteria regarding how long you can stay on the Planning Commission. Members shall be appointed by the City Council for three year terms so that only one-third of the appointments will expire on Decmber 31st of each year. No member may serve more than two consecutive three-year terms unless the average years of service for all Commission members is less than four years. A member who has served two terms may be reappointed by the City Council after a one year absence. At this point if you use both criteria, Nazarian, Lundquist, Lyall are at the end of their tenure. The average tenure is 3.7 years with nine voting members. Prince - would be Planning terms. She would like to recommend to the City Council that they in favor of reappointment of Fred Nazarian to the Commission because he has not filled out two -three year Moe - At the last seminar, the subject was brought up about reimbursement for gas mileage and found out that other City Planning Commission members do get reimbursed for mileage. M/No Second/F Moe/ - to recommend to the City Council to keep the three members whose tenure is up until such time that they can be replaced by new applicants. (Motion failed because of lack of a second<Abstain: Novak -because he feels this is too political of an issue›). The attendance records show that Planning Commission member David Lang has missed five meetings in a row and this would be potentially a fourth member leaving the commission. The Planning Commission requested City Administrator Overby to contact Vicki Gifford, Howard Michels and Bob Drehrer who have served on past Planning Commissions to see if they would be LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1985 PAGE 4 interested in applying. Chairman Nazarian suggested creating a position of Historian for the Planning Commission in order to keep Bill Lundquist, but Bill felt it was time for him to retire from the Commission. Rob Chelseth suggested alternates be permanent and the outgoing regular members be in reserve and called when needed. "7. 1979 Comprehensive Plan City Administrator Overby explained the four areas of concerns leading to plan development that was given in a handout to the Planning Commission members. There was discussion on population growth and how the Metro Council projections were derived. It was suggested that the local development trend could be figured on the number of building permits that have been issued each year. If you take the growth line without Cimmarron it would be completely different. This shows you the impact of what one project can have on the growth of the City. Novak - Could this figure be perceived as what the Metro Council would like to see us have for population? City Administrator Overby stated that there is more to it than forecasting growth. Metro Council also wants to have a handle on who is going to get funding for the upgrading of sewer systems already in place or funding for new sewer systems. Funding for upgrading is their first priority; new systems are second, and then only within the MUSA Line. City Planner Rob Chelseth referred to pages 77-79 in the 1979 Comprehensive Plan which refers to ranking issues by subject matter. Not all issues are for a 5 year term and you might want to -sort them before you rank them. The following suggestions were made: Environmental problems should be the number one consideration. Question cluster development versus one house per 1 1/2 acre lots or 4 houses on 40 acres. You can scratch the 201 Program since it has been adopted. You can combine 5a. busines and industrial development and location with 7d. select appropriate or desired commercial uses. Combine 4. alternative forms of managing growth and 6. zoning as a method for managing growth. Should come up with interim uses for between Agriculture and Residential. The City Engineer does a good job with the 5 year road plan. The Capital Improvement Plan should be looked at because this gives direction to the City Administrator and the Planning Commission. Under Environmental Planning, the surface water management plan will be an issue. How much has been done in regard to economic need. The surface water issue should be checked into to see if it has been addressed properly. Under Planning Process, you need to inform and include the public about the planning program. City LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1985 PAGE 5 Administrator Overby suggested the idea of sending out a survey postcard to the public for input on their five most important issues. M/S/P Graves/Moe - There will not be a Planning Commission meeting on Monday, December 23, 1985. There will be a Joint Council and Planning Commission Meeting on Monday, January 13, 1986. (Motion carried 8-0). M/S/P Moe/Graves - to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 10:38 p.m. (Motion carried 8-0). 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. 7:30 P.M. AGENDA LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 9, 1985 MEETING CONVENES 1. Agenda 2. Minutes: November 12, 1985 3. Annual Planning Institute - Report by those who attended. 4. County Road 19B - Discuss future land use, planning and development impacts. Prepare recommendation for City Council. NOTE: See enclosed map of road right-of-way. 5. Tartan Park - Use of Maintenance Road for park entrance. 6. Auto unloading facility in Oakdale. 7. Membership openings in January, 1986. Solicit names of potential candidates. 8. 1979 Comprehensive Plan A. Discuss background data summary. B. Discuss Community Issues - Prepare new ranking list for joint meeting of Planning Commission and City Council in January. *Bring your copy of issues from the last meeting. 9. Other NOTE: Please plan on staying until 10:00 p.m. or later, due to the amount of discussion that will be necessary. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 12, 1985 Chairman Nazarian called the meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Present: Schiltz (departed 8:45 p.m.), Novak, Prince, Lundquist, Moe (arrived at 7:42 p.m.), Bucheck, City Administrator Overby and City Planner Rob Chelseth (arrived 8:43 p.m.). Absent: Lyall, Lang, Graves, and Martens. 1. Minutes: October 7, 1985 October 28, 1985 M/S/P Prince/Lundquist - to approve the Planning Commission minutes of October 7, 1985 meeting as amended. (Motion carried 4-0-2<abstain: Schiltz, Bucheck>). M/S/P Lundquist/Nazarian - to approve the Planning Commission minutes of October 28, 1985 as presented. (Motion carried 3-0-4<abstain: Schiltz, Novak, Prince, Bucheck>). 2. Introduction was made of the new Planning Commission members Allan R. Martens, 3099 Laverne Ct. and Ann Bucheck at 2301 Legion Avenue N. 3. Final Plat Approval - Phase 2 of Tartan Meadows In 1981, the plat of Tartan Meadows was approved along with plans and specifications, but because of economic conditions, the owner, Willard Morton, did not proceed. In 1983, Mr. Morton received approval from the Council to develop the area in phases, citing the continued economic slow down as preventing him from completing the entire subdivision. The first addition has been completed and now Mr. Morton has submitted a final plat for the second addition. There are no significant changes from the original 1981 plat; therefore, a new preliminary plat is not required. In Larry Bohrer's letter to the Planning Commission dated November 7, 1985, he states that a temporary cul-de-sac is required at the west end of 12th Street to allow vehicles and snow plows to turn around. A permanent easement will be required afor this cul-•de-sac. If 12th Street is extended west in the future, this cul-de-sac will be removed and the permanent easement vacated. City Engineer Bohrer recommends that the final plat for Tartan Meadows 2nd Addition be approved subject to the addition of the permanent roadway easement as described above. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 2 Commission member Prince asked why could not the Cul-de-sac be gravel instead of bituminous because it will be ripped off. Administrator Overby will ask Larry Bohrer if this could be done. M/S/P Schiltz/Moe - to recommend to the City Council that the final plat for Tartan Meadows 2nd Addition be approved subject to the addition of the permanent roadway easement as is recommended by Larry Bohrer in his letter dated November 17, 1985. (Motion carried 6-0-1<Bucheck>). 4. Revised Section 32 Land Use Mr. Enright had suggested to add some light industrial west of Helmo Avenue and qouth of the 45 acre parcel. There was discussion on the difference between the Comprehensive Plan terms and the Zoning Map terms. The attached map reflects the revised terms and desired commercial area requested. Commission member Novak voiced concern on this future land use plan infringing on the marshy areas close by which have attracted egrets. M/S/P Prince/Moe - to recommend to the City Council to adopt the Land Use Concept Plan -Section 32 and West 1/4 Section 33 with the revised terms for the purpose of the engineering feasibility study. (Motion carried 5-0-1<Bucheck>). 5. Comprehensive Plan Revisions City Planner Robert Chelseth attended the Planning Commission meeting to give needed direction and information for the new Comprehensive Plan. Chelseth suggested they start with discussions to develop and prioritize new land use and planning issues based on 1985 and projected conditions through 1990. It would be best to review and discuss the Comprehensive plan section -by -section. The Met Council looks at land use components in terms of demand for systems. M/S/P Moe/Prince - to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 9:45 p.m. (Motion carried 6-0). LAND L. . SECTION 32 AND WEST 1/4 SECTION 33 ii SCALE: I11= 800' JANUARY 1983 REVISED 4/85 ; REVISED 10/85 I m REVISED 11/85:ti IOth STREET '11-4l MEDIUM zfl to _. HIGH RES. O OFFICES OFFICE & `C MM. �'! , �OMh1ERCIAL MEDIUM to HIG 44 AC. AC.' '\ RESIDENTIAL OFFICE &. COLRERCIAL 44 AC. / c? ./ LOW to MEDIUM I ' 60 AC. 2'I LINE 1 \C Z1 \\. 45 Ad. RESIDENTIAL CORCIAL COMMERCIAL 120 AC. ' r r k 55 AC. -4th STREET EE ..xi s' : .cr at. Y✓4 *'CIE :' ':t215..14' I- 94 . Lce 17-7 CSAH,70 1d • it r 1 MEDIUM to HIGH RESIDENTIAL 55 ,AC. riTh 1 w ' 0: 0 z HIGHWAY I. COMM. 23 AC..