HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-08-00 PZM• CITY OF
LAKE
iikELMO
a
City of Lake Elmo
777-5510
, 3800 Laverne Avenue North / Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042
The Lake Elmo Planning Commission will meet at 7:00 p.m., Monday, May 8, 2000,
in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 3800 Laverne Avenue North, Lake Elmo, Minnesota.
1. Agenda
2. Minutes - April 24, 2000
3. Old Village Land Use Plan
4. Tower Ordinance
5. AG Zone Amendments
b. Other
7. Adjourn
AGENDA
11
s
ra printed on recycled paper
Approved 5/22/00
Lake Elmo
Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes
Monday, May 8, 2000
Chairman Armstrong called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City hall,
3800 Laverne Avenue North, Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Present: Commissioners Berg, Helwig,
Lipman (7:25 p.m.), Mandel and Sedro. Absent: Commissioners Brass, Herber, Ptacek and Sessing.
Also present: City Planner Dillerud, Councilman DeLapp and Village Commission Vice -Chair
Emmons.
1. Agenda
M/S/P Sedro/Berg - to approve the agenda, as presented.
(Motion Passed 5-0).
2. Minutes
M/S/P Armstrong/Sedro - to accept the minutes from the April 24 meeting, as amended.
(Motion Passed 5-0).
3. Old Village Land Use Plan
Planner Dillerud presented overhead graphics, which illustrated the Planning Commission and
Village Commission "Old Village Land Use Plan." He noted the Planning Commission idea depicts
relatively the same strategy, but on a smaller scale. He explained that the timing of the
Comprehensive Plan Update submission to the Met Council remains, but has provided them with
evidence of the city's progress. He urged the Commissioners to "get it right", rather than hastily
make a recommendation regarding the future land use plan for the Old Village area.
Commissioner Mandel said he recognizes the differences in the Planning Commission and Village
Commission plans, but suggested the Planning Commission plan focuses more on the revitalization
of the Old Village area, and not as much on the green -belt. He explained that he felt it was
important to have a population that could support a viable downtown area, and suggested 1200 new
residents may be a good number to consider. He noted his opposition of PDR's, i.e. tax dollars to
purchase land. He said he wanted to see a realistic plan.
Commissioner Berg said he felt the Village Commission may have misunderstood the Planning
Commission's plan, and presented several overhead graphics that depicted overlays of the old village
area. He said he felt the Planning Commission had arrived at a good decision to limit the south
boundary of the old village plan area to 306 Street. He said he felt the Planning Commission plan for
the old village was good, but may be "tweaked."
Commissioner Lipman asked how important it was that the green -belt area be uniform in size.
Planner Dillerud said the size of the green -belt was not the only factor, stating the primary reason
for the green -belt was to define an edge to the old village to avoid "leak"; a wider green -belt offers
less opportunity for development; the green -belt could be used for other purposes, such as wetland
treatment systems, stormwater holding areas, and finally, the location of the green -belt preserves
some viewsheds.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Monday, May 8, 2000 page 1
Councilman DeLapp urged the Commissioners to think of the downtown area as a "walkable"
location from surrounding developments, and encouraged them to "think big" in terms of planning
the green -belt.
Commissioner Sedro said she was leaning toward the Village Commission Plan because: 1) The
number of new units is less in the Village Plan; 2) The Village Plan has more receiving units available
than the number of transfer units; 3) The Village Plan green -belt is sufficient to accommodate water
run-off for existing and proposed development; 4) 1/8 mile green -belt as in the Planning
Commission Plan would be imperceptible; 5) The Village Commission green -belt location had a lot
of thought put into it (lot by lot), whereas the Planning Commission Plan did not take many specific
circumstances into account -it's more of a concept plan than an implementation plan; 6) I prefer to
put the new units inside the green -belt, as in the Village Commission Plan, i.e. I can see that a certain
minimum density is required in order to have a viable business center, but I would not like to see
those units outside of the green -belt; 7) Although I don't want the city -county to raise taxes in order
to purchase the green -belt, since Chuck Dillerud believes that PDR/TDR will work here, I'm willing
to defer to his experience on this issue even though I personally don't know all the details of how it
would work - recalling that the Planning Commission Village Land Use Plan came out of a desire to
avoid PDR's).
Planner Dillerud suggested there may be tax abatement dollars available for PDR's.
M/S/P Armstrong/Berg - to limit the old village area in the Planning Commission
recommendation to north of 30a' Street, consistent with the current guiding.
(Motion Passed 6-0).
M/S/P Armstrong/Mandel - t recommend the City council consider a wider green -belt
version of the village plan, provided this is accomplished through PRD's & TDR's or grants
from outside sources, and not supported through local and county tax increases.
(Motion Passed 5-1). Opposed: Helwig.
M/S/P Helwig/Armstrong - to encourage City promoted obstacles that would result in the
State of Minnesota NOT expanding the width of Manning Avenue in Lake Elmo.
(Motion Passed 4-2). Opposed: Mandel, Lipman.
M/S/P Berg/Lipman - to request the Village Commission provide the Planning
Commission with evidence of which areas in the green belt take priority over others.
(Motion Passed 6-0).
Commissioner Lipman stated he would attempt to gather some information regarding population
estimates that could support a viable downtown area.
M/S/F Sedro/Lipman - to amend the Planning Commission Village Plan illustrating all
residential development occur inside the green belt.
(Motion Failed 2-4). Opposed: Helwig, Berg, Armstrong and Mandel.
M/S/P Helwig/Sedro - to send current revisions of the Planning Commission Old Village
Land Use Plan to the City Council at its June 6, 2000 meeting.
(Motion Passed 6-0).
M/S/P Armstrong/Lipman - to direct staff to provide Planning Commissioners with City
Council agenda staff reports as they relate to the Old Village Land Use Plan.
(Motion Passed 6-0).
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Monday, May 8, 2000 page 2
4. Tower Ordinance
Planner Dillerud said the City Council reviewed the proposed amendments, and their comments
were included in the staff report.
(Commissioner Helwig excused himself from the dais, and made the following responses to the City
Council directions, (italics).
1. The City Council was concerned about signal interference from towers of the
height proposed with electronic devices in the neighborhood - TV's radios,
garage doors.
The FCC licenses amateurs, and interference could occur at any height
2. There seemed to be a general Council feeling that 120 feet was too high.
FCC allows 175 feet, and 120 feet is nece nary for optimum efficiency to operate four f rquenaes.
120 feet is cunrntly allot zd n-wind generators, and cdlular service tuners in the City.
3. The Council appeared to favor a CUP for each tower, and perhaps limiting
the towers to the Larger lot residential zones - certainly NOT in R-1 districts.
Ok, adda section on CUP's for Touters.
4. The Council suggested that inclusion of solar panels in this ordinance was
not appropriate.
Remote solar panels from the ordinance
M/S/P Armstrong/Lipman - to direct staff to call a Public Hearing at its Monday, May 22,
2000 meeting, regarding the proposed Tower Ordinance.
(Motion Passed 5-0-1). Abstain: Helwig
5. AG Zone Amendments
Chairman Armstrong reviewed the current draft AG Zone Ordinance.
The Commissioners discussed amendments, and made the following motions:
M/S/P Lipman/Berg - to add Rural Agricultural Uses -garden plots, tree farming, game
refuge and horticultural services; Recreational Services - miniature golf/driving ranges;
and, Farmstead Occupation Uses - nature farm/museum, farmers market, office, inside
storage and brewery/winery as permitted uses in Section 3.
(Motion Passed 6-0).
M/S/P Sedro/Mandel - to add Section 3 - limited vehicle trips generated per day.
(Motion Passed 5-1). Opposed: Lipman; unduly restrictive, and can be regulated within the
CUP process.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Monday, May 8, 2000 page 3
M/S/P Lipman/Sedro - to present the amended draft AG Zone Amendments to the City
Council at its May 16, 2000 meeting.
(Motion Passed 6-0).
6. OTHER
M/S/P Lipman/Armstrong - to direct Chairman Armstrong to compose a letter of thanks
to Commissioner Gerard for his service on the Planning Commission.
(Motion Passed 6-0).
Chairman Armstrong adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Young -Planning Secretary
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Monday, May 8, 2000 page 4