Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-28-08 PZMCUT L4f,:E City of Lake Elmo iliEL MO I 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 (651) 777-5510 Fax: (651) 777-9615 Www.LakeElmo.Ora NOTICE OF MEETING The City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission will conduct a meeting on WEDNESDAY, May 28, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. AGENDA 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approve Agenda 3. Approve Minutes a. March 24, 2008 (with corrections) b. May 12, 2008 4. Public Hearings a. Zoning Text Amendments: i. General Administrative Sign Regulations ii. Agricultural Businesses iii. Sign Ordinance Provisions — Temporary Signs 5. Old Business 6. New Business 7. City Council Updates a. May 20 — Acceptance of Hidden Meadows (Rockpoint Church) Phase 1 Improvements 8. Adjourn SUBMITTED; 7-14-08 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 28, 2008 Chairman Ptacek called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Anderson, Deziel, Fliflet, Helwig, McGinnis, Ptacek, Hall, and Pelletier. STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Klatt, Senior Planner Gozola, City Attorney Jerry Filla Agenda MIS/P, to approve the agenda. Vote: 8:0, motion carried unanimously. Minutes — March 24, 2008 and May 12, 2008 M/S/P, Deziel/Hall to approve the minutes of the March 24, 2008 meeting with. corrections. Vote 6:0 with 2 abstentions, motion carried. M/S/P, Deziel/McGinnis to approve the minutes of the May 12, 2008 meeting. Vote 7:0 with one abstention, motion carried. Zoning Text Amendments Gozola informed the Commission that he would be reviewing three separate proposed ordinances and suggested that a hearing be conducted separately on each one. He reviewed the direction that bad been provided by the City Council and noted that the City must identify a substantial government interest to protect certain types of off -site signage. The three ordinances that had been drafted would amend General Administrative Sign Regulations, Agricultural Business and Temporary Sign Ordinance Provisions. Administrative Sign Regulations Gozola summarized and reviewed the first Ordinance related to the administrative provisions associated with the Sign Ordinance. Ptacek noted that the substitution clause had been added to clarify that non-commercial speech could replace the language on any existing sign. Gozola replied that conunercial signage would not be allowed under the substitution clause unless otherwise permitted in the underlying zoning district. Chairman Ptacek opened the public hearing for the draft Administrative Sign Regulations Ordinance at 7:16 p.m. Joan Ziertman, 5761 Keats Avenue, expressed concern that the sign fee and renewal fee was not included as part of the proposed Ordinance. Gozola answered that this issue would need to be Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-28-08 1 SUBMITTED; 7-14-08 considered in the future and that the Council sets all fees by Ordinance. He noted that any fees should be based on the time and money it takes the City to process each type of application. Deb Kruger, 4452 Lake Elmo Avenue, also questioned the fees and how the temporary and permanent fees would be set. Klatt stated that the Planning Department would need to estimate the time and cost associated with each permit before making a recommendation to the Council on an appropriate amount. Fills explained that it would be appropriate to bring a fee recommendation to the Council with the proposed ordinance. The public hearing was closed at 7:28 p.m. M/S/P, Helwig/Pelletier to recommend approval of the Administrative Sign Regulations amendments as drafted by Staff. Vote 7:0 with one abstention; motion carried. Agricultural Businesses Gozola summarized and reviewed the second ordinance related to agricultural business definitions and regulations. He stated that the intent of the proposed changes is to simplify and clarify the ordinance and to eliminate overlap between existing provisions. Each the uses defined would be incorporated into the current zoning districts consistent with the goals of the community. Ptacek asked for clarification concerning pick -your -own businesses, and specifically whether they should be classified under agricultural entertainment or agricultural sales. The Commission generally discussed that these types of businesses could be classified under both sales and entertainment businesses. The Commission debated the merits of the proposed screening requirements under the use standards. Billet suggested that the language be revised to indicate roof -top screening he optional instead of mandatory. Gozola indicated that there are screening requirements for other businesses in the Zoning Ordinance. The consensus of the Planning Commission was to leave this requirement in the draft. Hall suggested striking item "d" in the list of standards for agricultural sales operations. The Commission agreed to remove item "d" from the list in the draft ordinance. Deziel questioned if a minimum size should be set for a conditional use permit under the proposed ordinance. Filla replied that the Commission would likely want to review smaller sites since they could potentially not provide enough room for an agricultural sales business. The Commission raised questions concerning the application of provisions that regulate impacts to adjacent properties. Filla replied that as drafted, businesses would need to take action not to impact neighbors to the site. The Commission reached consensus that this particular language should be reworded to clarify the intent. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-28-08 2 SUBMITTED; 7-14-08 Ptacek opened the public hearing related to the Agricultural Business ordinance at 8:12 p.m. Joan Ziertman commented that pick -your -own businesses should fall under agricultural sales businesses since they should not generate any additional impacts. She noted that it is not always possible to screen all mechanical equipment on these types of properties. Ziertman pointed out some inconsistencies with certain parts of the draft ordinance and stated that she did not agree that uses should be regulated based on acreage since some businesses will require more land than others. Gozola agreed that the definitions and latter sections should be consistent and that they could be reviewed and updated as needed. Neil Kruger, 4452 Lake Elmo Avenue, discussed that no one would want to run an agricultural businesses if they needed to comply with all of the requirements that had been proposed. He stated that most agricultural businesses start as pick -your -own and should be allowed under both classifications. Deb Kruger questioned when screening would be required, and made suggestions for various changes to the sales business standards as drafted. She noted that there is a cost to the regulations and that the Commission should to consider the needs of the community in making its decision. Gary Johnson, 2500 Manning Avenue, referenced the action taken by the Council six months ago and explained that he thought the direction at this time was simply to allow agricultural businesses to continue. Ile stated his concern over the proposed regulations since they seem to be tailored to more urban communities. Johnson urged the Commission to keep the Ordinance simple if it wanted to keep the community's rural character, and that they needed to promote, not destroy, these businesses. The public hearing was closed at 8:34 p.m. The Commission discussed allowing pick -your -own businesses under both agricultural sales businesses classifications and generally debated the need for regulations as opposed to allowing activities that promoted the community's rural character. Ptacelc suggested that the Commission review and vote on each standard as drafted prior to making its recommendation on the Ordinance as a whole. Under the Agricultural Entertainment standards, the Commission elected to keep standards (a), (e),(1),(j),(1),(m),(o),(q),(r), and (u) as drafted and to strike the remainder under this section. Under the Agricultural Sales standards, the Commission voted to keep standards (2),(3),(4),(8),(9) with a recommendation that the language be tightened in (8) and (9) and to strike the remaining items under this section. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-28-08 3 SUBMITTED; 7-14-08 M/S/P, Hall, Pelletier to recommend approval of the Agricultural Businesses amendments with the revisions to the use standards as approved by the Commission. The motion was amended to remove any limits to the number of full time equivalent employees allowed in Agricultural Entertainment businesses. Vote 8:0; motion carried unanimously. Temporary Sign Ordinance Gozola summarized and reviewed the third ordinance primarily related to temporary signage. He reviewed all changes to the Ordinance that had been made since the last Planning Commission meeting. Gozola explained that the City needed to make a connection between only allowing off premises advertising for certain businesses and a specific governmental interest, and that if none could be identified then all businesses must be allowed these types of signs. Gozola stated that Staff was able to make a link between agricultural signs and the preservation of rural character but could not make the same link with real estate signs. The staff recommendation was to limit off -site signage to agricultural businesses only, Three options were presented to the Commission, including an ordinance that allowed off -site advertising for agricultural businesses only, one that allowed these signs for both agricultural businesses and real estate developments, and one that did not allow off -site advertising anywhere in the City. Filla reviewed a legal opinion that had been provided to the Commission on this matter. Deziel questioned if signs would help developers reach development targets and avoid penalties with their projects. Klatt replied that there would still be many opportunities available to advertise development projects and that the housing market would be more likely to drive build out than any specific advertising. The Commission discussed how to proceed with a review of each ordinance and decided to consider the second option since the others dropped portions of this Ordinance as drafted. Helwig left the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Fliflet asked how temporary sales signs differed from permanent signs according to the Zoning Ordinance. Gozola replied that a business could use both' and that a permanent sign may be used for signage at any time as long as it is not removed from the site for more than a 12-month period of time. Deziel commented that the City has an incentive to promote and encourage development within housing projects and that there is a significant public interest in advertising for these developments. Pelletier offered support for allowing two off -site signs for agricultural businesses and stated her opposition for off -site real estate signs. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-28-08 4 SUBMITTED; 7-14-08 Millet indicated that the need to obtain land owner permission should limit the overall number of signs that will be installed in the City. Chairman Ptacek opened the public hearing related to the Temporary Sign Ordinance revisions at 10:15 p.m. Joan Ziertman stated her support for the first option that would allow temporary signage for agricultural businesses only. She suggested that the Comprehensive Plan supports the preservation of community character. Ziertman pointed out that there are a lot of conservation easements along major roadways which would limit where signs could be placed. She stated her concerns about potential confusion over which type of permit might be required, and recommended that the City not require an annual renewal if the sign does not change. Klatt responded that a permanent sign would allow for the replacement of a message on the sign. Deb Kruger discussed the history of her businesses and stated that off -site signs should be permitted as a way to continue the viability of the business. She expressed concern over the potential cost of the required permits. Gary Johnson noted that the current Ordinance allows signs over and within the street right-of- way with Council permission and that he considers this off -site advertising. He objected to a fee for on -site signage. Johnson said that he believes many of the signs discussed are already permitted and that he has installed a lot of signs in other rural communities that are allowed. The public hearing was closed at 10:47 p.m. Pelletier stated that she was concerned about the existing businesses in town and questioned why the City would provide benefits to some businesses and not others. Hall suggested that the City could allow off -site signage for all businesses and then evaluate this change at a later date. Filla responded that he would not recommend this approach since these signs would obtain vested rights if the signs were not temporary. Gozola discussed that the Commission could look at a fourth option to allow off -site advertising for all businesses, but that this Ordinance would need to come back to them as a new hearing. Filla noted that this option was not one the Commission was asked to consider. M/S/F, Ptacek, Pelletier to move forward with the first option that would allow temporary off - site signage for agricultural businesses only with an amendment to Section 3 as drafted. Vote 2:4 with one abstention; motion failed. Fliefliet suggested allowing off -site signage for agricultural businesses now and then considering additional amendments in the future. She stated that she did not want to delay the progress at irnplementing the current ordinance as drafted. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-28-08 5 SUBMITTED; 7-14-08 M/S/P, Deziel, Fliflet to recommend approval of the first option that would allow temporary off - site signage for agricultural businesses only but to also recommend that the City Council consider a fourth option as well that would allow off -site signage for all businesses. Vote 6:1, motion carried. Informational Items Klatt discussed that the City Council had recently accepted the public improvements installed within the Hidden Meadows Phase 1 project area. Adornment The meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kyle Klatt Planning Director Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-28-08 6