Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-02-00 PZMA CITY OF LAKE - ELMO City of Lake Elmo 777-5510 3800 Laverne Avenue North / Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE The Lake Elmo Planning Commission will meet at 7:00 p.m., WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2000, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 3800 Laverne Avenue North, Lake Elmo, Minnesota. 1. Agenda 2. Minutes - January 24, 2000 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Update 2000-2020 Land Areas North of Highway 5 (excluding"Old Village") 4. Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Planned Unit Development Concept Plan (continuedfrom January 24, 2000) Northeast Annexed Area Stillwater Investment & Betty Smith, applicants 5. Other 6. Adjourn printed on recycled paper DRAFT - amended Lake Elmo Planning Commission Wednesday, February 2, 2000 Meeting Minutes Chairman Armstrong called the meeting to order t 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 3800 Lake Elmo Avenue North, Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Present: Commissioners Berg, Gerard, Helwig, Herber, Lipman, Mandel, Ptacek, Sedro and Sessing. Absent: Commissioner Brass. Also present: City Planner Dillerud. 1. AGENDA Add: 5.a Update of "Streets" Workshop 5.b Comments - Calthorpe Study M/S/P Helwig/Sedro - to approve the agenda, as amended. (Motion Passed 9-0). 2. MINUTES M/S/P Gerard/Ptacek - to approve the minutes for the January 24, 2000 meeting, as amended. (Motion Passed 7-0-2) Abstain: Herber, Helwig. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Update 2000-2020 Land Areas NORTH of Highway 5 (excluding "Old Village') Planner Dillerud explained the intent of the initial portion of his presentation was to inform the viewing public of the procedures and progress the Planning Commission has made regarding the 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan. He said for over a year, the Planning Commission has spent many hours at early 6-7 p.m. meetings devoted to updating the plan. He noted several reasons for addressing the Comprehensive Plan at this time, including State Statutes that mandate cities in the seven county metro area to periodically review and update their comprehensive plans. He said the completed work includes the 2020 Comprehensive Plan General Policy, which states: 1. Develop land use and infrastructure plans to accommodate household and population forecasts of the 1996 Regional Blueprint (12,500 persons in 4,700 households) by the year 2020. 2. Encourage the majority of the new households created to be efficiently developed in a rural context in the form of Open Space Development cluster neighborhoods; and, within the Old Village Area of the community, as defined by the Old Village Plan/Policies. 3. Reestablish the Regional Blueprint designation of "Rural Growth Center" for Lake Elmo. 4. Limit Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) expansion to the area that can be served through the Metropolitan Council WONE Interceptor. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 2, 2000 page 1 Also completed to date are drafts of Inventory and Land Use. He presented and described maps that illustrated planning districts, Citywide Land Use Plan, Rural Agricultural parcels of 20+ acres, remaining Rural Estate parcels and the North Districts. He discussed citywide projections and reminded the Commissioners that the Land Use plan they have developed for the entire community will accommodate forecasts, but not mandate or drive the population of the 1996 Regional Blueprint. Chairman Armstrong opened the comment portion of the Public Hearing at 7:55 p.m. Planner Dillerud said although no testimony was heard, he did receive 3 phone calls from residents prior to the hearing; one preferred the 21/2 acre (conventional) guiding; the other two expressed support for changing RED to RAD on their land. Chairman Armstrong closed the comment portion of the Public Hearing at 7:57 p.m., and stated comments regarding the north districts may be heard at the Public Hearing February 16, 2000. (Commissioner Lipman — exit at 8 pm) 4. Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Planned Unit Development Concept Plan (Continued from January 24, 2000) Northeast Annexed Area Stillwater Investment Corp. & Betty Smith, applicants Planner Dillerud said the Planning Commission tabled consideration of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Planned Unit Development Concept Plan applications at its January 24, 2000 meeting, after adopting a recommendation for the definition of SRD land use. He noted the addition of the following as further criteria defining SRD land use classification. 6. The depth of the site, including all common ownership parcels, may not exceed 2,640 feet, as measured perpendicular to the Lake Elmo Corporate Limits line referred to by Site Characteristic #2 above. He said, at the time the agenda packet was assembled, the applicant had not provided any additional information relative to these applications. Mike Gair McCombs, Frank, Roos Associates (Representing the applicants) Mr. Gair presented a memo, dated February 2, 2000 (attached). He said he did not want his commentary to appear inflammatory, but the Stillwater Investment proposal meets all the criteria for SRD, except density. He urged the Commissioners to recognize the very unusual circumstances of the site and how this affects the proposal. He asked for an "even-handed" decision regarding the applications. John Arkell (Applicant) Mr. Arkell stated 5 months ago; he was prepared to go with Oak Park Heights. He said City Administrator Kueffner called him and said, "let's work something out." He said for 5 months he met with her and other staff members to reach a compromise. He said he operated in good faith. He explained he had met with the City Council in working sessions, the neighbors and environmental engineers. He said the proposal is a compromise, explaining the original plan Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 2, 2000 page 2 reflected a density of 300. He noted 147 units calculated in the current proposal are slightly incorrect, that being 91 single family lots and 28 townhouse units totaled 147 UNITS on 119 LOTS. He said he could exclude the townhouses for seniors, which would reduce the density from 147-that includes some multi -use units, to 119 single family lots, but he said he thought townhouses for seniors was something the community wanted. Ed Stevens 10133 47th Street Mr. Stevens said he cannot match the experience and time put into this pmjet, but expresses his desire to maintain low density as much as possible. He said the applicant makes an eloquent case for higher density, but he is concerned zaith the transition area that is "creeping" density today, what will happen two years form now He asked the Planning Commissioners to keep that in mind Wyn John 8883 Jane Road Mr. John said when he last talked with representatives from Independent School District #834; thy said nothing about a longtenn plan, inferring infrastructure in the area. Barb Engle 55`h Street (resident) Ms. Engle said she would be willing to zeork with the developer regarding 55`h Street being designated as a "deacend" street. She noted that the applicant had indeed made compromise in the plan and stated she truly wanted the land to stay in Lake Elmo. M/S/P Armstrong/Gerard — to add criteria to the SRD definition as follows: 6. The depth of the site, including all common ownership parcels, may not exceed 2,640 feet, as measured perpendicular to the Lake Elmo Corporate Limits line referred to by Site Characteristic #2 above. (Motion Passed 9-0). Commissioner Gerard asked the Commissioners to consider the logic in recommending 119 single- family units, which calculates to 1.45 units per acre (Met Council requires no less than 3 units per acre to qualify as "Urban.") Commissioner Mandel said, "As to the history of density in Lake Elmo, we have fought hard to keep rural character, and it took a lot of time and it didn't come easy. There was a lot of input from the residents. Density is a huge issue in Lake Elmo and this property (applicants) is in Lake Elmo. The City Council had a meeting a few months ago to discuss reducing density in the OP to 8 or 7 per 20, and no action was taken. I am asking everyone to look at where they live now, and ask themselves if they want to double or triple the density. My problem is not amending the comprehensive plan. This is ripping it up. All this density is not what we are about, or why we sit here every night, volunteering. As far as Lake Elmo, this is not what we are about. The ink is not even dry on the land use guiding, and the City Council goes along with our recommendation that it can be OP. Our community is rural and different and I think we should stay with that." Commissioner Sedro asked Mr. Arkell if an optional plan could include keeping the townhouses and exchanging density with the areas of the site that have the smaller lots. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 2, 2000 page 3 Mr. Gair said the plan has always been to provide transition densities, and Commissioner Sedro's idea presented an option to maintain the townhouses in the northern portion of the parcel, and possibly increase the lot sizes in the south. Mr. Arkell said he was nervous negotiating with the Planning Commission. He said he felt he had wasted 5 months and 1.0's of thousands of dollars on a plan that everybody approved except the Planning Commission. He said he respected the Commissioners for explaining how they felt about this plan. He noted he will go to the City Council with his proposal, and urged the Planning Commission to make a recommendation at this meeting. He stated he wants to keep this development in Lake Elmo. Chairman Armstrong said the Planning Commission is a recommending body, and not in a position to negotiate. Commissioner Gerard said he felt the Planning Commission had two concerns, those being; the visual impact of the "creeping" affect the development may create; and, Lake Elmo would try to accommodate the plan, but needs to stand on its rural principles. He said the property is indeed unique, and he felt the SRD could be crafted so that it keeps "creeping" out. M/S/P Armstrong/Gerard - to recommend a land use guiding for the Stillwater Investment parcel of SRD, consistent with the definition formulated by the Planning Commission and recommended to the City Council, finding the uniqueness of the location of the site; the site is adjacent to urban development; and, keeping this parcel in Lake Elmo. (Motion Passed 7-1-1). Opposed: Mandel. Abstain: Helwig. M/S/P Armstrong/Gerard - to recommend approval of Stillwater Investment Planned Unit Development Concept Plan, reflecting the density as recommended in the SRD definition, finding the Planning Commission prefers residential development to commercial development in the Northeast Annexed Area, focusing on keeping the parcel in Lake Elmo. (Motion Passed 6-2-1). Opposed: Mandel -needs to see the revised plan and feels density is still too high; Ptacek-City Council can grapple with SRD definition before dealing with the concept plan. Abstain: Helwig. 5.a "Streets" Workshop Commissioner Helwig thanked the Planning Commissioners, members of the Fire Department, Public Works, and City Council for attending the workshop that focused on how emergency and maintenance equipment "fits" in Open Space residential development streets. He noted that while touring The Fields of St. Croix and Tamarack Farms Estates (which have narrow, one-way streets), some maintenance and fire equipment found their wheels over the curbs and if cars were parked in the streets, Chairman Armstrong said, basically, Mayor Hunt set up a study committee that will develop some ideas to change the ordinance that will accommodate emergency vehicles. 5.b Calthorpe Report Planner Dillerud distributed two copies of the Calthorpe Report for the Commissioners to view. Wyn John said he had attended an Open House to review the Calthorpe Report, and indicated members of the Metropolitan Council seemed enthusiastic with the submittal. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 2, 2000 page 4 Chairman Armstrong read the inscription on the Metropolitan Leadership Award presented to the City of Lake Elmo in recognition of outstanding leadership in the advancement of smart growth development design in the St. Croix Valley. Chairman Armstrong adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Young -Planning Secretary Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 2, 2000 page 5 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting February 2, 2000 MFRA #12202 1. SRD Definition > Staff Report, 1/19/00, page 8 Findings and Recommendations Section states present SRD is "Over 2 Units per gross acre" density. (Historic Platting has been at higher Density) > Staff Memo 1/24/00, page 1 SRD is best approach (items 1-5, pages 1 & 2) & not exceed 2.0 Units /Ac. Net of,DNR wetland. > Staff memo 1/28/00 adds depth of site to SRD definition. 2. Planning Commission Position of .9 units/Ac for SRD classified land is arbitrary relative to above recommendations and observations; definition should be consistent. 3. Site realities: • • Neighborhood support for concept & staying in Lake Elmo • Sewer and Water service available now! • Extraterritorial Planning supports more intense uses • Urban Reserve Classification for North portion supports urbanization • Adjacent Land uses and Urbanization Supportive • Lake Elmo infrastructure supports Proposal - 141 mkt% • "Land Uses Transition is Appropriate"* - • Proposal responds to City purpose and definition of P.U.D.* • "Reasonable land use design approach" * * January 24, 2000 Planning Report s:\main:car12202\notes2-2