Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-08-90 PZMThe 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. AGENDA LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 8, 1990 7:30 p.m. MEETING CONVENES 1. AGENDA 2. MINUTES: September 24, 1990 3. Request to Move a Manufactured Home into an RR Zoning area. Bob Mogren, Mogren Landscaping 4 Residential Estates Zoning Ordinance 5. Supporting Ordinances for RE Zoning District 6. Other 7. Adjourn Date Approved: 10-8-90 Date Issued: 10-19-90 LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 24, 1990 Chairman DeLapp called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Present: DeLapp, John, Johnson, Johnston, Wilfong, Stevens, Bucheck, Thomas, Enes, Administrator Kueffner and City Planner Mike Black. Absent: Conlin and Arkell. 1. AGENDA Chairman DeLapp suggested putting time limits on each agenda item as follows: finish Agenda by 7:45, finish Public Hearing for Residential Estates by 8:15, finish Public Hearing for Arabian Heights by 9:00, finish Request from Cliff Adkins by 9:15, finish R-1 Zoning Ordinance by 9:30, finish Supporting Ordinances for RE Zoning by 9:45, and if running behind the Chairman will call for a motion to continue. M/S/P Johnson/John - to approve the Agenda with time constraints as ammended. (Motion carried 9-0.) 2. MINUTES: September 10, 1990 M/S/P Bucheck/Enes - to approve the September 10, 1990 Planning Commission minutes as presented. (Motion carried 6-0, abstain: Stevens, DeLapp, Thomas.) 3. Public Iiearing: Residential Estates Zoning Ordinance Chairman DeLapp called the Public Hearing to order at 7:40 p.m. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the St. Croix Valley Press, September 12, 1990. City Planner Mike Black explained the RE Zoning District has been created by the Planning Commission and City Council as an attempt to fill a gap between the R1 zoning (1-•1/2 acre minimum lot size)and the RR zoning (10 acre minimum lot size). The City does not want to allow anymore development at the R1 density without sanitary sewer, and the City does not plan on having sanitary sewer for 20 or more years. Steve Korhel, 5540 Keats Ave. N., wanted the history that brought the setback to 100 feet, he would like to see it greater than 100 feet. Chairman DeLapp answered they started with 30 feet (taken from the R1 district zone) and went from there. Commissioner John stated the problem with a greater setback is that eventually the lot will become so confined that it would be difficult to position a house on the lot at al].. George Crocker, 5093 Keats Ave. N., asked if the RE Zoning District is an attempt to accomodate the "Arabian Hills" development. The Commission replied no. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 24, 1990 page 2 Rolph Schubert, 5222 Keats Ave. N., asked for clarification on the need for this new zone, is this a desire to increase the population density? Also, how will this accomodate septic systems more easily? Commissioner Johnson explained that the City is eliminating the R1 zoning district, there will no longer be any 1-1/2 acre lots platted in the City. Under the RE Zoning District the minimum lot size will be 2-1/2 acres, this will have an effect of decreasing the density in the City. Property owners presently zoned RR (minimum lot size of 10 acres), however, can look at the RE Zoning District as a transition zone between an existing R1 zone and an RR zone. It's a good compromise for the City since it's eliminating the R1 zone. It's going to create very nice developments. It is still the City's objective to maintain larger lots as much as possible, but the City has to compromise a little for all of its citizens, most of the people at this publice hearing may want 10 acre lots but that's not the whole city, we have to listen to everybody. Vice Chairman John added that many current property owners look at their property as their long term pension plan because that is their source for retirement benefits. Keith Raleigh, 5435 Keats Ave. N., asked to have explained why there is a "dip" in the RE zoning line on the future land use map. Administrator Kueffner explained that at the public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan a property owner asked the City to consider allowing him the RE zoning density, there were no objections to this at the hearing so the City granted his request. Jay Raleigh, 540 S.Saratoga St., St. Paul (owns some property on Keats Ave.) asked why the "Area of Principal structure: 1500 sq. ft. minimum above grade including walk out levels if at least 25% of building perimeter is above grade" has been dropped from the earlier version of this zone? Also, why maximum length of dead end streets/cul-de-sacs is not addressed in this ordinance? Chairman DeLapp explained that the dead end streets/cul-de-sacs Ordinance is an existing City Ordinance and is automatically in this new Ordinance. Vice Chairman John explained that the Area of Principal Structure was dropped because it became too difficult to define. Commissioner Enes added that it also dictated the type of design. Commissioner Johnson stated that there was also discussion on this point that it might be considered discriminatory. Don Richie, 9393 55th St., How did the Planning Commission arrive at 2-1/2 acres minimum, why not 5 acres? Commissioner Johnson stated that in the early stages there was a proposal of RE5 and RE2-1/2, some of the future land use would be designated as areas to be developed at a minimum lot size of 5 acres and other areas wouldbe developed at minimum lot size of 2-1/2 acres. The Planning Commission then asked for direction from the City Council on this and the Council suggested 6 lots per 20 or an average of 3.3 acres per lot, so that's the direction the Commission's been going in ever since. Again it's an attempt to accommodate all of the citizens in Lake Elmo, not just one group or another. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 24, 1990 page 3 Mary Cane, 5010 Keats Ave., stated that the area schools are full now, if we bring more people in, allow more building, we're going to need more schools and everyone is going to have to pay for these new schools. Karin Schubert, 5222 Keats Ave. N., asked the Commission to clarify 6 lots per each 20 acres of gross land area. Can a developer cluster lots if they meet all other requirements of the Ordinance? The Commission answered technically it is possible with property of more than 20 acres to plat more than 6 lots on 20 acres as long as each lot meets all other requirements of the Ordinance. Peter Eggen, 5250 Keats Ave. N., noted that "Arabian Hills" proposed plat map shows a 20 acre plot with 8 lots on it, will this be allowed if the RE Zoning District is approved? The Commission will discuss this at the next meeting to find the solution. George Crocker stated his concern about the large transmission towers running parallel with highway 36. Literature from the scientific community shows a much better understanding of the biological implications of continued exposure to the magnetic fields that these powerlines are generating. Has the Planning Commission or the City Council investigated this or given any interest to this potential health hazard at all? Chairman DeLapp stated that Commissioner Stevens has been collecting articles on this subject. Chairman DeLapp closed the public hearing at 8:40 p.m. M/S/P Enes/Johnson - to table this discussion for two weeks until the next meeting on October 8, 1990. (Motion carried 9-0.) 4. Public Hearing: Rezoning & Preliminary Plat Arabian Hills Chairman DeLapp called the public hearing to order at 8:50 p.m. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the St. Croix Valley Press, September 12, 1990 and all property owners within 350 feet were notified. Roger Kolstad, agent for Charles Nelson/Northern Lakes Diversified -owner, presented the the preliminary plat map of "Arabian Hills", legally described in part as Section 3, Township 29 N., Range 21 W. Kolstad stated the intention is to keep this development looking as natural as possible by transplanting trees and trying to keep the landscape in its natural state. Charles Nelson stated that there is also park land dedicated. Don Richie commented the piece of land dedicated as a park is actually a swamp and no good for a park. Nancy Hansen, Chairperson of. the Parks Commission, stated that she has been out to the proposed park site and this parcel is indeed a good piece of property for a park. The Parks Commission will follow through on this proposal and make a final decision soon. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 24, 1990 page 4 Keith Raleigh stated he and his brother have split their property in half across from the Tauer driveway which they thought would someday become 53rd Street, but now 53rd Street will be located further north and traffic from Foxfire will exit onto Keats across from his driveway which is a blind hill and also will create headlights shining into his house at night. He is also concerned about the drainage system of this development since his drainfield is just across the street close to the road. Bob Meyer asked the Commission to itemize the changes on the plat map of "Arabian Hills" from the map of the "Old Tauer Place", also will the new road affect the existing pond and trees? Kolstad stated that there were only three changes: (1) the two lots on the northwestern corner frontages have been changed from 145 feet to 150 feet in accordance with the Ordinance; (2) "Out Lot A" was added to lot 5; and (3) the lot numbers in the southeast corner have been corrected. Administrator Kueffner stated the Valley Branch Watershed may make a statement regarding the pond. Kolstad stated that as many trees as possible will be relocated and as many as possible will be left alone. Nelson added that too many trees in one location can be a fire hazard, but the intention is to keep the property natural and all City Ordinanes will be adhered to. Bob Meyer asked Chuck Nelson to explain who is Northern Lakes Diversified and what qualifications do they have. Mr. Nelson replied that they are a small corporation and some developments to check out are Pine Vista 1 & 2 and Sherwood Green, both located in Lino Lakes. The City has an application on file with Northern Lakes Diversified's telephone number. Rolph Schubert asked if this proposal requires and Environmental Impact Statement. The Commission replied no, it does not. Jay Raleigh mentioned that gravel and silt run through the culvert from Tauer's driveway onto his property and once development starts this problem may become worse and wanted to know what the developer plans to do about this and the existing Tauer driveway. Cletus Tauer responded that when farm plowing is discontinued this silt problem will go away. Kolstad added that the driveway will be vacatedand the drainage system will be worked out by the engineer's. Don Richie commented that he moved to Lake Elmo for its rural community, and he is offended by the change in attitude of the City Council and Planning Commission. Steve Korhel was concened that the drainage and ponding in this development would affect the pond on his property. The Commission responded that the developer must submit an engineered drainage plan for approval before allowed to build. M/S/P Buchec]c/Wilfong - to extend the Public Hearing ten more minutes. (Motion carried 9-0.) LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 24, 1990 page 5 Keith Raleigh asked the Commission if the developer will be required to plant mature trees in front of his house as a screen from the develpment. The Commission replied no. M/S/P Bucheck/Johnston - to extend the Public Hearing to 10:00 p.m. (Motion carried 9-0.) Pete Eggen expressed the development will look too out of place since it's located in the middle of a field. Steve Korhel presented a petition signed by every property owner on Keats Avenue. Mary Cane stated that she is against the re -zoning of this property. Bill Michel of No.St.Paul stated that he is directly affected by this development in that he is a potential buyer and has gone so far as to sell his house and enroll his children in Lake Elmo schools and asked the Planning Commission to take into consideration his position. Steve Korhel asked if the Met Council has not approved the Comp Plan yet, can this development go in? The Commission responded that the Met Council does not approve the Comp Plan it only makes comments. Commissioner Wilfong stated there is overlap between the two public hearings for RE Zone District and preliminary plat of "Arabian Hills". Commissioner Bucheck asked that the Administrator have recommendations on drainage from the City Engineer and City Planner at the next meeting. M/S/P Johnson/Johnston - to table this public hearing until the October 8, 1990 Planning Commission meeting. (Motion carried 9-0.) 5. Cliff Adkins: Request to Rezone to Residential Estates Cliff and Marian Adkins, 2227 Lake Elmo Avenue, requested that the City consider allowing them to plat their approximate 16+ acres into an RE subdivision. The Adkins explained that they bought this land 35 years ago with the plan that some day they could subdivide for their children and also for investment purposes. Commissioner Thomas noted that there may be a zoning error in the Future Land Use Map for this property. This property is shown on the Future Land Use Map as Suburban Residential, but this has to be verified as correct (there is confusion on this). The Commission made these suggestions to the Adkins' (1) If there is an error in the Future Land Use Map, they should have the map ammended to make it correct; this would put them in a better position to enhance their probability of showing a hardship, (2) make an attempt. to combine their proposal with Durands' (in order to keep some continuity in the road system); (3) bring their proposal to the City Council and request a variance from the RE Ordinance. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 24, 1990 page 6 6. Repeal R-1 Zoning District M/S/P Johnson/Thomas - to recommend that the City Council adopt the resolution, and direct the Planning Commission to prepare an ordinance prohibiting any further R1 zoning. (Motion carried 8-0, 1-against: John, the motion is premature since we haven't established and finalized the RE district Ordinance yet. M/S/P Johnson/John - to table the balance of the agenda until the October 8, 1990 Planning Commission meeting and adjourn the meeting at 11:05 p.m. (Motion carried 9-0.) f 2411 )qc/ *** PETITION OPPOSING ROGER E. KOLSTAD REZONING *** I oppose the ROGER E. KOLSTAD request for rezoning, from Rural Residential (RR) to Residential Estates (RE) (see property description in item-3), and his request for preliminary plat aproval of a nineteen (19) lot subdivision, to be known as Arabian Hills (see property description item 3). I also oppose the ratification of "RESIDENTIAL ESTATES ZONING", because each of these acts are NOT IN KEEPING WITI-I THE CURRENT LAND USE POLICIES (see items 1 and 2 ), that are expresed in the existing Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. * date * name * address 96 L /ert e -55 -a /4 9-ay- 0 y 71<intals`s-f ,feats auc 9- c`l-q� 983gfr. 6011 91 z//a0 56/S I/ '/a,,1y /q6 `��sss )(e 91 a 'l io $$- x z r/7 %Lv/9a q/Ay/.90 y�ay/yo !� ,Sa'os &&e. * age >a *** ATTACHMENT *** item description 1. Rural Residential (RR) This District permits housing sites on land parcels with at least 10 acres. At the present time much of the land within this District is being used for residential purposes or is being farmed. Permitted uses include hobby farming, raising horses, etc. Accessory building allowances are less restrictive than in the R1 bistrict. 2. Agricultural Development To protect prime agricultural lands, where requested by land- owners, from incompatible forms of development, such as large -lot development subdivisions, that threaten the viability of commercial farming operations. To promote through the Washington County Agriculture Extension Service, the State DNR, and the U.S.D.A., proper environmental and land management practices that will maintain prime agricultural lands. 3. Property Description The Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, the north 91., feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, and that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter lying northerly of the south 610 feet thereof. All in Section 3, Township 29, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota. • REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW Meeting Date: AGENDA TOPIC: Mogren Landscaping: Moving Manufactured Home in an RR Zoning Area October 8, 1990 ITEM NO. 3. Bob Mogren, Mogren Bros., is requesting approval to move a manufactured home into Lake Elmo as the residence for the person that is the watchman for their sod fields. The location is just south of Oak -Land Jr, High School on Manning Ave. Attached is the information supplied by the applicant and the name of the property owner. The area is and has been for many years used agriculturally, i.e., sod fields or cornfields. There are no other dwelling units on the property and no variances are necessary. If a positive recommendation is given, I would suggest to stipluate the property must be kept clean and outside storage to be behind the dwelling unit and out -of -site. All existing building codes are to be enforced on the dwelling unit if approval is given by the City Council to move the structure onto this site. Jim McNamara Building Official { CITY OF LAKE ELMO REQUEST TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OR PLANNING COMMISSION you wish to address the City Council or Planning Commission, follow the suggestions listed below: (Please r int) �7 "� Name dam% 1 2 2—O g /� _./C iZ.} Address ,t7€ij?�=��J—(�._ please Date// —JD"- Phone 7.7 Agenda Item or Subject you wish to address / ,/,,w4,4xcJ f' Company oY Individual Representing, if,applicable..._ NOTES: Please complete this form so that you may be recogniz appropriate time on the Agenda. You are under no obligation you decide against it during the meeting. Please state your address so that the record of your comments will be complete of this meeting. ed at the to speak if full name and in the minutes CITY Uc U,inv, itmtwiu DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning District Amendment Text Amendment Conditional Use Permit Variance Appeals Trailer Park Site ea Bldg. Plan Review Mining Permits Applicant Owner CV Simple Lot Division _Large Lot Subdivision Subdivision Sketch _ Preliminary Final Subdivision Variance Flood Plain Conditional. Use Permit Shoreland Permit • _Planned Unit Development Vn 2 •S ,RZ 101, ' ke {, v 1 /1J11.- R 7) 2 7 Name) - (Address] (phone) 1-2,6e item��g4t 01? . w i o ssd ty (*fame) r - (itdd%ess) (1 hone)77° 10G O1z3ae 4e kr DR � O Oi as Cce. le,�iv(- -cC�.` ��o�� ur 1 �S`i `0c,r) t Property location (Street Address a*+ Legal Description): (l12I N w iy F_ % FxC (arm St,, raQ s0i4/ k1 r.,0<, A/. __Alin N y W . !. t at, a n t $ i- 1 <7 }= t. 1-t f, -I-k es.; .S E t u S,F ego. c .0* Zen r. 14.e pi; PR_-p tiro 134 37o36 -al so freo c.o,ae No . 3G-Oz9 2i -(2...-e00/ Descriation and/or Reason for Request (Cite Ordinance Section): ( lac'!)-1\7 ll' 0 I&Ai I (/o qoI. Lo„,4ren ozi R.R. Lo7- ' ©nl Y(4-au10v 0/Ek - Lfi<tdlJ 17z. gtca% Se,11a0/ d Lt.)/LL t° 4v•e Sou7--H In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully under- stand the applicable provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and current administrative procedures. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to addition application expense. gnat re of Aoplic t Date PROCEDURES FOR MOVING A STRUCTURE INFORMATION NEEDED 1). Photos of Structure from at least two (2) different angles. 2). Survey of Property that structure is to be moved to. 3). Site Plan: Show structure location, Septic and Drainfield Location, Well Location and Driveway Location. ----Notification must be given to property owners within 350' of property in question. Notify Property Owners Planning Commission (Hearing) For Council Approval Note: Applicant should realize that a Moved Structure must meet the present Building and Electrical Codes. !,2 %& t-V/1y 1 NEILSoN LAWN SPRINKLERS SINCE 1911 JOB NAME ADDRESS: 4 A N., DATE DESIGNER STATIC PSI GPM MOEN BROTHERS SUPPLY n,inrir rin pee/ 33 Exley AljE .� F'okteS± L.vrKc row„,shIP a Jae) /st 72J a..46ear t-504 AAA -CI /f i Ss/0/ ( Xlfi-e- (aa)•0979) Dave 4CA t& y 30 - a 75-6 /aoss sj SS +L S,c,Lte-t eO- 90/ & Ez C6z.€ SSo yal a8y w - sfi /44(A./ C I+n)-rvA �.&6[6 i 9-/ 3 9 3) orc YeJu,r 1••,Vs retreat : House .A790 ,22te. Acreo u ,P .4rn .. th..73 araeers ,$u re • Berner C:Onlr2:hr_l1 . td Inc --• 1 - Fyne, Net 41 L • y twa .VakfNl.CSIERN L2fi .11aa HehU Raw, C r 'Ebert -ad SO • olczn .Medan �30 • ,6J Pevrial Canaryy tiAra Ir$19 I NJLi.A ELMO 20• 5 .�. f eks 1 Pets PI + I--_ _ 3r '• eN Anre1 Oi 3S0flos $0 •a.4tsh./an h 1 I,yt L�1 .b /61 a3 Jun A � /:ark C) J013 Meru•n I C,h of O r M ppo/dl Cake' E•'o w 4 •C' c 8O7 r-� `S19 ID • u<s rJrI .' ,`( .T Ldu,-t f • O ,-,sr, ch - ' z9 os r56t " :rani Fred CPI LAKE 6 Pnrn6z 0 �C� 80 4• :4 its, its sa o 'tstr r ;-,1 GraJys • aeor.9e I 5 t.Y[ ' L 1 John tarreone • • ^le afs' �, a • ..Da ecue a .3 ' NA 11 PCJ �sre �'..1 n l V v 1" .HOCJnL]1rG � `�Ar;el�G Y • E"lad( ■r 'L'rs• ,VO oa 98 ' v9'�� IVY YO „It '' i:'3 4 4.; 5 4< J _0 3z 04 8 D • 3l! Leo f A/.c; <oo Q C dg S LAKE 0 ELMO 0 22 ELMO Y6E8 0 0 ,Clayrnn Oeuc;3ar eril C r.s •a3J Ian re, 'h 1 Jay ►- r K�k�l3 4Jd at"' K 3 rent'', 7, � lVL' f' T Jt Jui,.,., ..Yi c Sa"..a'd 'r0 fn W l+' I pLi 7 H�HL J u PS2rhn 6oetsc eI 3t0 • I! r19'!z 23 ,jiEGIONAL RESERVE \ 26 O 99a.9 Manors :72 RJ.&0 cJu„rry Gunhy L1,$Ia. alb 118 SZ • L '1Jra r-, a L/1ho,n. Q �mrs f0'' 2J2b nlanyner 6'f3 731 r "°•9 I 34 Lim 1 3,A,aa q9 •,,.. J `,�K,1 c. ✓„,.., #ireV. j6e ner''r • ncaler bus pis yC�,1 O.,reJ S F '�b Fels Q�i3S W-7 'r' es 7 IA 1.e. elan ~Port IJdh s • Ha/d,.nson n 0. z 0 .` Farms 4.) ,3 3 W •'. W /a5., deign ' Herzfeld Late Elmor..,< i•4a�r r,erl yt74J ro focCon e Mealoa5 • A/d, ton VILLAGE OF WOOOBURY PG.2B 140f,0 ru9e r7L let . 414 Pl,eland Mtado, JJ 235'1 NR_I Gmarian fbrk H.ssoc'aJsi • • 'lare �.�C1 you /4 r 3 rear., yak _h, to !nueal 74 1 •, 0-E 9'1 'i11P Fs' 2 CO.Ca CALL OR WRITE TO INQUIRE (612) 439-2047 11170 60TH ST. N. STILLWATER, MN. 55082 MEMBERS OF: S 3- TOWN AND N 1200C :arms Ire 81 11eLtery Kern < 130 •a ,ssclnll T Y 09J 18 42898 _ 1. .� M,nrraPohJ • Sr.. b 4 / Metro/501i tan A,rporl Corrmarion 119 i J rLS 1 . S,r3h Rueson Jchll�rcn Forms M[ /942 57 rryie, Lr • 75er 3 ; 4N frcr m7 ora 5 ab Jr •„1��^9 `Jr tA✓ 8� 4s.11 c sr rira •� „r Ja qne4rL: tarp "NA 13—` S/ of M,M Nei • /797 : •.123 1 VO .. "'4 s .'r1.H !4 e" • ,�1,; u r' ,fins ?c'rr J 11 ,, Rasa_ 11 Caid 'Idler 'a Is s 'c ; t.o.'ff era! char J ep0 .a o I vF Jr, 844 :85 fpgers II ,< • SD - - s' A Pe! r I< : '� . {c� Ma 1^ r 1' a .552 J1' ,•• i � 1442 J ig.nia 4.9 > .e . O Llayne I O 40 = kro1nqq��Ard G/..mad W 3y -A J 15a.1 a EJLh,is� z_„ I Sons Inc L.I• .+/.IL. Oy 11 117 ..'/L Acres s• 17%; to • ss.•o LL JC .1 • . PAo r \' ,'• ' 7 7 1 ,3R Jahn • .j1� 0 Jahn 1 • A',<CG a rh I• 24 e0 A• • li P•tir 14 ,o /6.43 hJ •O A[fl 133 [13 za A[rr! Yk 1 51e-343 i:l"S' 4,3 �62J • ee,I 1.1j /34G !Callen Jitd lh VO 1,21:42, 2 f--Sri n.s tea` 3 y F n re3n 1.111. Q •G Sand time frA 4.3 a2 Qaa IJ.as 0, .fore M 4A4 1e,/Y •M:,h � Js: �,k p C/OJerialL Farm IS56 Char/c3 Noaley 9925 •JP �10r/Erfli r .. 4,charcl Se/see/5 ,00 IS q,Y97 rerI LL 0 1.4 ory Zee 2 e !re, ny Mr< A 'p . A.12 I -giI'. '•=i HEIGHTS Jr. of Jr of `eb M�nne.k710. 7 id7 1M,M addhfe Are. /a4 � 13 La,<,JAbet Cahar c s 1883 SIEGEL 16 Lro Q • JL .-',. r.- 3 S � 4 dra_'srl743 p 4/• yr 1 • rs eaxrJ .said • '•./' 2 �� a;rvr.✓ava 6 yy s ex ar,fan r ✓ y �'..ur 1 /20 o ,a -.. 727 •1 c.;.-�.r T "�,n lD VO 1 410 412. .50 f 0 /41rocro la James I Arrant Callen of -Minn _loco r SOUTH, WEST -33 Si 31.4-34.1 State of 79 ELAND PG.29 FIRST REQUEST FOR PLANING COmr"ISSION REVIEW Meeting Date: AGENDA TOPIC: Supporting Ordinances for RE Zoning District October .8,- 1990 ITEM NO. 6 Background Information for September.24,.1990 Attached are the suggested changes to our Municipal Code as it relates to the RE Zoning District. These standards were included in the complete RE Zoning standards developed by the PZ, but as you may recall, I brought to your attention that some of these standards were already in our code. Background Information for October 8, 1940 Please bring the background infosuiation from the September 24th meeting And be ready to discuss the supporting ordinances for RE Zoning District. JAMES R. HILL, INC. PLANNERS ENGINEERS SURVEYORS 9401 JAMES AVE. So., SUITE 140, BLOOMINGTGN, MN 55431 612/884-3029 Fax 084-9518 MEMORANDUM TO: Mary Kueffner, City Administrator and Lake Elmo Planning ommiss'on FROM: Michael J. Black 1/yL ►�� DATE: October 4, 1990 RE: RE Zoning District Standards The following is a list of criteria and standards for the proposed RE zoning district which remain unsettled. My suggestions, recommendations and comments on each issue are included. LOT SIZF. Currently the ordinance states that the minimum lot size is 2.5 to 10 acres nominal This would allow the subdivider to include half of the adjacent road right of way in the lot size calculation. I recommend that the lot size standard be 2.5 acres'to 10 acres aross area exclusive of road right of way. The reference to nominal area is appropriate for the total area of the land to be subdivided. As an example, a 20 acre metes and bounds legal description would commonly be described to the center line of an adjacent county road. Hence the site to be developed would only be a 19.5 acre net acres site or a 20 acre nominal site. In all cases however the developer should meet the minimum lot size of 2.5 acres. DENSITY At the September 24, 1990 Planning Commission meeting, a question was asked if a subdivider of land is only allowed to create 6 new lots on each 20 acres of land. As an example, a 40 acre tract of land would be reviewed as two 20 acre parcels on which 6 lots could be developed on each 20 acres. Or, is the 40 acres to be subdivided considered as one total site upon which 12 lots may be designed in conformance with the zoning performance standards. I recommend that we calculate the allowed number of lots based upon 6 lots per 20 nominal acres. For example, a 73 acre parcel would be allowed 21 lots (73 acres /; 20 acres = 3.76 x 6 = 21.9 or 21). I believe it is in the City's best interest and that of the subdivider to be able to design the subdivision according to the site's natural conditions such as topography, soils, forest areas, wetlands, etc., provided that the total site density is not exceeded and that all minimum lot standard are met. The performance standards such as minimum lot size, set backs, the 250 foot diameter circle, minimum street frontage and lot depth to width ratio, all provide "space" standards between principal structures and control the subdivision density. Lake Elmo Planning Commission October 4, 1990 Page 2 FRONT YARD SF.T SACK As I recall, one of the first drafts of the RE zoning regulations called for a 150 foot front yard set back. The current draft states a 100 foot standards. At the September 24, 1990 Planning Commission meeting, a citizen comment was that the minimum standards should be greater than proposed. I am still comfortable with and recommend a 75 foot front yard set back. First, this is a minimum set back and builder always have the option to build a home further back on the property. Also, the uniqueness of each site including the designated location of primary and secondary drain - field locations will often dictate the proper placement of a home on the lot. Also, the front yard set back is measured from the property line which means, that depending on the width of the street, an additional 14 to 18 feet of boulevard area is added to the "front yard space". STREET STANDARD The City's zoning code, Section 401.380 P., states that "All streets shall be improved in accordance with the standards and specifications for street construction established by the City Council." In the past local residential streets have been constructed with a 32 foot wide pavement area. The City has contemplated a reduction in pavement width for the RE zone. The City Engineer and Public Works Director have both recommended maintaining the 32 foot standard. There are many design factors that are considered when a street is designed and constructed. They include; speed, access and intersection alignment, horizontal and vertical alignment, sight distances, gradients, drainage, ditches versus curb, curve radius, turn-arounds and many other important details. The function of a local residential street is primarily for neighborhood through traffic connecting to other local residential streets and moving traffic to collector streets. Maximum speed on local residential streets is 30 MPH and typical traffic counts are approximately 1,000 average trips per day or less. The local residential streets are primarily designed to carry two way traffic -not for parking of vehicles. However, in most cities, local residential streets are designed for two way traffic and some on -street parking. For example, on a 32 foot wide street parking along one side of the road would not restrict the free movement of two way traffic. Parking on both sides of the street could occur with very minor delays for two way traffic if vehicles parked exactly at opposite sides of the street. I recommend that a 28 foot wide street be used for the local residential streets in the RE zone. That street width will accommodate two way traffic and allow for one side on -street parking. The on -street parking need in the RE zone should only be occasional due to the 75 to 100 foot front yard set back standard and the length of the driveways. Lake Elmo Planning Commission October 4, 1990 Page 3 AREA NFEDF,D FOR ON -SITE SEWER The current draft of the RE zone states that "all newly subdivided lots shall have at least one acre of land dedicated for septic system use. This acre may consist of a maximum of two separate parcels neither of which may consist of less than 0.4 acres." I belive there were two main reasons for establishing this standard. First was to prevent a situation where a 2.5 acre lot consisted of 2 acres of wetland area and .5 acres of "buildable" area. And second, to assure that adequate space is available for the future reconstruction or expansion of the on -site sewer system. The minimum one acre of land suitable for on -site sewer is approximately eight times the area needed for a typical four -bedroom home. I recommend that we only require a .5 acre area on each site to be tested and suitable for on -site sewer systems. I also recommend that along with the minimum lot area of 2.5 gross acres we also require that a minimum of 1 acre on each lot be exclusive of all drainage and utility easements. °\Yi\kt Z-4Let (Developer Requirements) Add to Section 401.240 B. 4 i, and renumber existing "i" to "j". 401.240 B. 4. i In the Residential Estates (RE) Zoning District and undeveloped Ri Zoning district, the developer shall: (1) Provide a landscape plan which shows how subdivision will assume a rural character (define) through the placement of ponding, bums, trees and tree seedlings, shrubs and shrub seedlings, and native grasses. (2) Plant a minimum of 6 trees to serve as interim land- scaping (unless subdivision is determined by the City to be naturally wooded). (define). (3) Provide spaced or clustered planting of 1-1/2 inch caliper deciduous trees (in City boulevard?) at a rate of two (2) per 100 lineal feet on both sides of city street; (4 foot conifers may be substituted)(Setbacks from curb to allow provision for anticipated snow storage?)(How can this be anticipated?). Proposed Wording for "The Number of Accessory Buildings" Add to page 301-66 Section 301.130 C 14 c: and renumber existing "c" to "d". c. Residential Estates - R.E.: For parcels in the Residential Estates Zoning District, two buildings with a total area not to exceed 1200 square feet. Signs add to code: 505.315 - Signs not permitted in Residential Estates (or Residential) Zoning districts. Subdivision identification monuments and permanent signage will not be permitted in any residential subdivision platted after the adoption of this ordinance. Road Standards Attached is a copy of a resolution adopted by the City Council in April of 1980 adopting the Engineering Standards for the City of Lake Elmo. I have also attached, from that book of standards, the street standards that have been used in all developments since its adoption (with the exception of the Forest). You should bring with you to the meeting the information that I previously distributed to you regarding street widths. R 80-18 RESOLUTION CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ENGINEERING STANDARDS FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO. WHEREAS, required improvements are often designed and constructed by parties other than the City of Lake Elmo under the City Engineer; and, WHEREAS, those preparing plans and specifications for said projects seek the guidance and counsel of the City Engineer with respect to the design standards for said improvement; and, WHEREAS, there is desire on the part of the City Council, City Engineer, and staff to clearly define the policy with respect to Engineering Standards for the design, specification and construction of said public improvements, and such other improvements as are required by City Ordinance and policy, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo that: The ENGINEERING STANDARDS of the City of Lake Elmo dated April, 1980, are hereby adopted as the Engineering Standards for the design, specification and construction of public improvements and such other improvements as are required by City Ordinance or policy, in the City of Lake Elmo. ADOPTED THIS THE 1st day of April, 1980, by the City Council, City of Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota. SIGNED: Thomas G. Armstrong Mayor ATTEST: Lcv,,%tt( T (caQ- Laurence E. Whittaker City Administrator J 6L61 `380.1.00 Z 'ON ONIMV80 t —8 nen-a 1-8 71-7 a 9 4 r HPROPERTY LINE _ ivtkiik I, A I VARIES 16' RIGHT OF WAY (VARIES) c_ PROPERTY LINE 161 VARIES .. t :•..• n e :,• ... 7 I' M_l N.. _BT0OT_PHSO:11L0Es_ 1.......Q.::„......,___ 47.4____Ht 0 Ef Ala — L k CO 014113 3>tbr1 AO A_LIO m o co -1 u) m rn o m 0z 8' 4' BITUMINOUS CURB DETAIL — 2" BIT. WEAR COURSE, MnDOT 2341 6" CLASS 5 GRAVEL BASE PLACED ON APPROVED SUBGRADE THIS SECTION USED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF UTILITIES or-tqin, (1602.060) D. Notification of Construction. The City is to be notified at least 24 hours in advance of the date the construction will start. E. Plot Plan. Prior to the construction of a driveway, a plot plan must be submitted which shall indicate the location and specifications for driveways and curb cuts in accordance with this chapter. The plot plan submitted shall be approved prior to the issuance of a permit for a driveway. 1602.070. Standards. The following regulations shall apply to all driveways, curb cuts and aisles: A. Width. The maximum width of any driveway and curb cut shall be twenty-four (24) feet, except in the Residential Estates (RE) zoning district. B. Width in Residential Estates Zoning District. The maximum width at lot line shall be twelve (12) feet, and the maximum width at public street shall be eighteen (18) feet. C. Distance between Driveways. The minimum distance between curbs of driveways at right-of-way line shall be ten (10) feet in any residential district, except Residential Estates. In all other districts, except Residential Estates the minimum distance shall be twenty (20) feet. D. Distance Between Driveways in Residential Estates Zoning District. The minimum distance between curbs of driveways at right-of-way line shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet. Driveway access limited to one per lot. E. Width of Aisles. Any aisle in any parking lot in a zoning district other than a residential district shall be a minimum of twenty-four (24) feet. Any aisle in a parking lot in any district serving a building containing three or more dwelling units shall also be a minimum of twenty-four (24) feet. F. Distance from Intersection. No driveway or curb cut shall be less than twenty (20) feet from any right-of-way line of any street intersection, except that in retail, business, and industrial zoning districts, the minimum distance shall be fifty (50) feet. G. Driveway Angle. The minimum driveway angle from a two-way access street shall be ninety (90) degrees. The minimum driveway angle from a one-way street shall be thirty (30) degrees. 1602-2 H. Control of Traffic. Where commercial land uses are adjacent to residential districts, ingress and egress from the commercial uses on streets leading to or through the residential districts shall not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that adequate access to public right-of-way is thereby denied. In this manner traffic shall be controlled to insure that the location of driveways shall not constitute a hazard nor be injurious to adjacent residential uses. I. Access to Thoroughfares. On properties having frontage on both thoroughfares and minor roads, access shall be provided via the minor road wherever feasible in order to reduce the number of curb cuts on thoroughfares. i 1602-2A (1602.070) J. State and County Highway Requirements. The proposed driveway is to be constructed so that if it opens into any street designated as a state or county highway, all additional specifications of the appropriate highway departments will apply. K. A driveway must be at least five (5) feet from any lot line except the lot line it crosses for ingress and egress. 1602.080 Parking Areas. See Sections 301.130 E and F and Section 1504 or this Code. 1602-3