HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 12, 2001
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
Fire Station - City Council Chambers
6:30 p.m.
L Call Meeting to Order:
2. Roll Call:
3. Approval of Minutes:
4. Public Hearings:
A. Case File #00-084 The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment to the
City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in Sections 23
and 24, Township 115, Range 22. The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the
current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office
Park) designation to Rural Density. (Continuedfrom the January 29,2001 meeting)
B. Case File #00-083 Rock Creek Homes are requesting variances to minimum lot area and
structure setback to the ordinary high water mark for the construction of a single family
home on the property located at 5690 Fairlawn Shores Trail SE. (Continued from the
January 29, 2001 meeting)
C. Case File #01-001 Centex Home is requesting a zone change for 38.9 acres of vacant
land located on the west side ofCSAH 83, Y4 mile south ofCSAH 42, in the East Y2 of
the NW Y4 of Section 28, Township 115 North, Range 22 West. The proposal is to
remove the Shore land District designation from this property and to rezone the property
from the current A (Agricultural) District to the R-2 (Low to Medium Density
Residential) District. (Continued from the January 29, 2001 meeting)
D. Case File #01-004 John and Linda Meyer are appealing the Zoning Administrator's
decision to not allow a 24 foot square detached accessory structure on Lots 62 and 64,
Twin Isles. (Continued from the January 29, 2001 meeting)
E. Case Files #01-005 & 006 Pavek Family Investments Company/Hodgson Trust is
requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Plat to be known as Regal Crest to
allow a cluster townhouse development consisting of25.58 acres to be subdivided into
78 lots for townhouse units on the property located on the west side of CSAH 21
approximately Y4 mile north of CSAH 82.
L:\OI files\Olplancomm\OI~enda\AG021201.DOC
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. ~.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
<\N EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
5. Old Business:
A. Case File #00-086 St. Michael's Variance Resolution. (Continued from the January 29,
2001 meeting)
6. New Business:
A. Review Subdivision Ordinance
7. Announcements and Correspondence:
8. Adjournment:
L:\Ollilcs\O I plancomm\OI pcagcnda1AG021201.DOC
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16. 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, JANUARY 16,2001
1. Call to Order:
Chairman V onhof called the January 16, 2001, Planning Commission meeting to order at
6:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Criego, Lemke, Stamson and
V onhof, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, City Engineer Sue McDermott, Zoning
Administrator Steve Horsman and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson.
2. Roll Call:
Atwood
Criego
Lemke
Stamson
V onhof
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
3. Approval of Minutes:
The Minutes from the December 11, 2000, Planning Commission meeting were approved as
presented.
Commissioner V onhof read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting.
Public Hearings:
A. Case File #00-072 (Continued) Holiday Station Stores are requesting a
Conditional Use Permit to allow a gas station/convenience store and carwash for the
property located north of Fountain Hills Drive at the southwest quadrant of the
intersection of CSAH 42 and Pike Lake Trail.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated January 16,2001, on
file in the office of the City Planning Department.
The City of Prior Lake recently received an application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
to allow the construction of a gas station, convenience store and automatic car wash on the
property located at the southwest comer of CSAH 42 and Pike Lake Trail. The Planning
Commission held a public hearing on this application on December 11, 2000. Due to the
number of issues pertaining to the application, the Planning Commission continued the public
hearing to January 16,2001, to allow the applicant time to address these issue. The applicant
submitted revised plans to the Planning Department on Monday, January 8, 2001.
The staff recommended approval of this CUP, subject to the following conditions:
1. The site grading and drainage issues as outlined in the memorandums from the
Engineering Department.
2. The parking plan must provide the minimum parking spaces.
3. An access easement for the shared driveway must be submitted.
4. An irrigation plan must be provided as part of the landscaping plan.
L:\O 1 files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
1
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16. 2001
5. Drainage and surfacing plans for the car wash must be submitted for review and approval
by the City Engineer.
6. Outside Storage and Display: No outside sale or display shall be permitted except
gasoline and other goods consumed in the normal operation of a car and limited to the
following products: oil, gasoline and oil additives, windshield cleaner, windshield wipers,
tires and batteries. No products shall be sold or displayed in any required yard nor shall
the total display area occupy more than 150 square feet in area or be more than 5 feet in
height. No other vehicular parts and non-automobile oriented goods shall be displayed or
sold outside.
7. Public Address System: No public address system shall be audible from any property
located in an "R" Use District.
City Engineer Sue McDermott stated the majority of the engineering issues have been revised
and are reflected on the new plans. The major issues were with the driveways. Most can be
worked out with the developer's engineer. The driveway entrance should be moved 10 feet
to the west in order to avoid a catch basin. The Engineering Department also requested that
the applicant hold a pre-construction meeting to meet with the private utility companies to
discuss the timing of relocation of substantial features in the western driveway area.
Kansier said the Holiday plans have identified all the outstanding issues. Some changes will
need to be made to the plan, however the staff did not feel those issues would warrant further
continuance of the items. They are minor items that can be addressed before this goes before
the City Council.
Comments from the public:
Victor Sacco, Manager of Real Estate for Holiday Companies, said they have reviewed the
conditions and will meet the conditions to the site plan. The Holiday Companies' engineer
was also available for questions.
Dave Baden, said he was a close neighbor to the area and questioned the direction of runoff.
Sue McDermott said there is an on-site storm sewer system and in accordance with the
building code they will have to provide drainage in the carwash. She did not see a problem.
Vonhofclosed the floor.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Atwood:
. Concurred with staff subject to the conditions in the report.
Stamson:
. The last meeting concern was landscaping. There was no clear plan. Those issues
have been met.
. The second concern was the impact on the neighbors. The surrounding lots are
heavily treed. There is adequate screening.
. Recommend City Council approve the request.
L:\O I files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
2
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
Criego:
. Why isn't there a drain basin with this project? McDermott said the sedimentation
holding ponds were graded in with the entire Fountain Hills Addition. The ponds
were graded in at that time. Most of the water will drain to the regional pond on
County Road 42, which was designed to take the drainage from this property.
. Questioned the sidewalk or trail in front of the station.
. McDermott explained the trail on the north side of Fountain Hills Drive, which
covers the industrial park connecting with Pike Lake Trail.
. Asked applicant to discuss the easement required for the second driveway. Sacco
responded Holiday decided it would be good traffic circulation to have the access cut
lined up with the side street parallel with Pike Lake Trail. Another concern was for
the utilities. Holiday will put together an easement with property holder Wensco.
. Kansier pointed out the development had always planned for a shared driveway for
these lots.
. The landscaping was laid out to help the residents. Questioned if there was more
landscaping on the west side of the property. Sacco said they looked for trees on the
southeast side that would block and screen. Pines trees are located on the site.
. Felt there should be larger evergreens to solve the problem.
Lemke:
. Agreed with staff s recommendation.
Atwood:
. At the last meeting there was a question on the Vierling fence. Kansier responded the
issue was with the west side of the plat, not part of this lot.
V onhof:
. Concurred with the Commissioners' comments. Encouraged better screening on the
southeast corner using larger plantings.
MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A GAS
STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE SUBJECT TO STAFF'S CONDITIONS.
Criego felt there should be more evergreens at a greater height.
Stamson felt the maple trees have a bigger canopy and will cover more area. If too many
evergreens are put in you can see over the top of them. The homes on the hill are heavily
treed as it is.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
This item will most likely go before the City Council on February 5, 2001.
B. Case File #00-089 Jane Crosson is requesting a Variance to permit a deck
structure with a rear setback less than the minimum required.
L:\O I files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
3
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16, 2001
Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman presented the Planning Report dated January 16, 2001, ,
on file in the office ofthe City Planner.
The Planning Department received a variance application from Jane Y. Crosson for a deck
addition to be added to a single family structUre recently approved under Building Permit
#00-983, to be constructed on the vacant lot at 14624 Oakland Beach Avenue. Eagle Creek
Villas, LLC, is the current owner and builder of the subject property, and Ms. Crossen has
purchased the property contingent on securing this variance to construct the deck addition on
the main level.
On September 25,2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 00-12PC granting
variances to lot area and lot width for this subject lot, an existing substandard lot of record.
The original building plans and variance request did not include a main level walkout door or
deck addition to the house, only a lower level walkout door to a ground level platform.
The following variance is requested:
A 13 foot variance to permit a 12 foot structure setback to the rear lot line rather than the
required minimum 25 feet.
The Planning staff believed the hardship criteria had not been met with respect to the
Ordinance requirements and the subject lot in relation to the proposed development plans,
including the previously adopted variance resolution. Staff recommended the Planning
Commission adopt the resolution denying applicant's variance as requested.
Comments from the public:
Applicant Jane Crosson, said she has a purchase agreement contingent on approval of the
variance. She is a current lake dweller. She would like to build a new house with the
convenience of accessing the barbeque area from the kitchen area. Crosson explained the
proposed structure included the common area not the actual lot line. She did not feel this was
an unreasonable request and stated it would increase the value of the home. She would enjoy
the deck May through October from all levels ofthe home. The neighbor's view will not be
affected.
Greg Engebos, 4931 Beach Street and 14582 Oakland Beach, felt all of the homes in the area
will be rebuilt at some time. He thought most of the neighboring homes do have a second
level deck and would like to keep the aesthetic appearance of the property as high as
possible.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Stamson:
· Four months ago when the home was designed without a deck, no accommodations
were made for a deck. It was designed under the ordinance and setback requirements.
It was an obvious conscious decision of the builder to eliminate space for the deck to
accommodate some other needs. The builder would not have done that ifhe felt it
was a great hardship given the home he was designing.
L:\O 1 files\O 1 plancomm\O 1 pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
4
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
. The hardship criteria has not been met under a number of issues.
. Nothing has changed to create a hardship.
. Deny the request.
Criego:
. This is a substandard lot, smaller than a substandard lot at 4,000 square feet.
. The first variance we accepted was a 3,500 foot change from the original plan. There
have been several variances made on this property that were justified.
. The common area was considered for impervious surface.
. The applicant is stretching this property. Now she is asking for more.
. There is more home than the property can handle.
. Not in favor of the request.
Lemke:
. Looked at the lot and neighborhood.
. Does not disagree with the Commissioner's comments, but a deck is customary and
reasonable in Minnesota.
. There is going to be platform underneath it.
. Support the deck.
Atwood:
. Agreed with Stamson and Criego, the deck is an afterthought. In a well thought out
plan a deck would have been included.
. Pointed out at the last meeting, the neighbors felt the variances on this property
would cause a hardship ifthey wanted to add on. Questioned flip-flopping the home
as previously discussed.
. Crosson said the plans were flipped-flopped. She pointed out she was not part of the
original plan. She put money down in November and made changes inside the home
to suit her tastes. Crosson questioned why there was no deck and requested the
vanance.
V onhof:
. Concurred with fellow commissions, the hardship criteria have not been met for any
further variances on this property. It is a small property area to provide a deck.
. Will not support.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY STAMSON, APPROVING RESOLUTION 01-
001PC DENYING A 12 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A STRUCTURE SETBACK OF
13 FEET FROM A REAR PROPERTY LINE RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED 25 FEET.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
Horsman explained the appeal process.
L:\O 1 files\O I plancomm\O 1 pcminutes\mnO 1160 l.doc
5
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
C. Case File #00-084 The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment
to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in
Sections 23 and 24, Township 115, Range 22. The proposal is to amend the Land Use
Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO
(Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density.
V onhof stated the Commissioners just received information submitted by the applicant and
will not have time to review. However, testimony would be taken by the public and most
likely the hearing will continue to the next meeting.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated January 16,2001, on
file in the office of the City Planning Department.
Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling have filed an application for a Comprehensive
Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pike Lake
Trail and CSAH 18. The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C-BO (Business Office Park)
designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land.
This property is presently zoned A (Agricultural). The east 160 acres ofthe site are
designated as C-BO (Business Office Park) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map,
and the west 160 acres of the site is designated as R-HD (High Density Residential). The
applicants have requested these designations be changed to Rural Density.
The total site consists of approximately 320 acres and has been cropland for several years,
although some portions of the site are wooded. The property is used for agricultural purposes.
There is a farmstead and outbuildings located in the southwest corner of the site. Also, the
site is subject to the provisions of the State Wetland Conservation Act.
In 2000, the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be
reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program. The City refused this request on the basis
the property no longer qualified for program participation. The City has no objection to
enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax protection
for existing farmland. The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A
(Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners.
The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term agriculture
has been in place since 1995. The applicants have not demonstrated any need to change this
designation.
Staff recommended denial of the request.
Comments from the public:
Attorney Patrick Kelly, Kelly & Fawcett Law Firm, 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza, St. Paul,
representing the applicants, stated the property does not qualify for the Agriculture Preserve
Program is because of the Comprehensive Plan. Kelly said land under the R-HD zoning
equates to 30 units per acre. Kelly believes his calculations would be 4,000 to 5,000 units
with the 160 acre parcel. This is not part of the MUSA. They studied the area dealing with
L:\O I files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
6
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
well system issues. When and if the Vierlings decide to rezone, the City's infrastructure
would be impacted. The Vierlings have been farming this property for 150 years. As part of
the operation the Vierlings utilize approximately 170 acres on County Roads 42 and 21.
They also have 55 acres on Prior Lake. Ifthe operation is shut down they will have no
choice but to develop.
Stamson pointed out the City is not asking for the amendment, the Vierlings are.
Kelly felt by amending the Comprehensive Plan the City has knocked out the farming
process. If they are out ofthe Ag Preserve they will be piece-mealing the development.
Sections of 20 or 30 acres will become office park or commercial. This is a contradiction in
reality, normally developers come in and want to put 4,000 or 5,000 units or 3 story office
buildings. The Vierlings are asking the City to put them back in the Ag Preserve and farm. It
is an 8 year period. With the Ag Preserve Plan they will maintain farming. It is a benefit of
open space for the community. Their farming is a profitable operation.
Stamson pointed out the Vierlings initiated the 240 acres removal out of the Ag Preserve two
years prior to the City changing the Comprehensive Plan. Kelly said at that time, Helen
Vierling's husband Leo was running the farm and there were other issues going on in the City
of Prior Lake. Leo chose not to re-enroll but he figured he had this 8 year window to take a
look at it and see what was going on with development. Leo passed away in 1995 and his
wish was to continue farming with his son, Michael. Michael has been successful and this is
the direction the family would like to go. Most cities are striving for open space and the
Vierlings are trying to accomplish that.
Stamson referenced the staff report suggesting the alternative of Green Acres. Kelly said it
does not do what the Ag Preserve does. Kelly then summarized the Ag Preserve definition.
(473H.OI Minnesota Statutes).
Stamson clarified the benefits of the Ag Preserve:
. Better tax advantages
. Protected from eminent domain
. Special Assessments
. Zoning Conflicts
Stamson asked Kelly what Ag Preserve does not do. Kelly responded it involves a tax-type
situation where it allows deferring assessments as soon as the farming operation ends. With
Ag Preserve, the cities can act. djfferent ways through the power of zoning. If the farmer is in
the Ag Preserve he does not have to worry about the headaches of conflict with the best
intentions of the city. Green Acres does not protect like the Ag Preserve.
Kelly went on to say there has been correspondence back and forth with the City of Prior
Lake since February of 1999.
Atwood questioned if the remaining 110 acres are part of the Ag Preserve. Kelly responded
it was part of the operation ofthe farm, but there is a drainage problem with the lake
property. It is zoned office/commercial on the comer of County Roads 41 and 21.
L:\O I files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
7
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
Lemke questioned what governmental body approves the Ag Preserve. Kelly responded once,
the City okays it, it is reviewed by the County and ultimately approved by the Met Council.
McDermott clarified there is trunk sewer and water along County Road 42 and this area.
When the County Road 42 and Pike Lake construction started a few years ago, there were
crossings put in to the north side of County Road 42. She stated she would be happy to
provide Mr. Kelly with the plans.
Stamson asked if there were any other designations besides Rural Residential that would
allow Ag Preserve. Kansier answered there was not.
Comments from the public:
Mike Vierling, 13985 Pike Lake Trail, thanked his neighbors for the support. Vierling said
people ask him why he just doesn't pack up his bags and go somewhere else. Sometimes
money does not buy happiness. He does not want to farm anywhere else. It wouldn't be the
same. Vierling explained some of the problems he will have ifhe is not in the Ag Preserve.
He would like to see his sons have the opportunity to farm just like his Dad gave him. The
neighbors love the open spaces. He knows he will eventually be forced out. Pretty soon
there is going to houses everywhere. He wants to run the farm like a business. He can't do
that unless he is in the Ag Preserve program and asks for the City's support. What is 8 years
down the line? Even ifhe wanted to sell it would take years get it right.
Stamson questioned Vierling if 8 years is a long enough period to justify the improvements
he would like to make. Is it enough? Vierling said it was and went on to say he does not
want to put in any improvements until he knows what is going on.
Lucy Vierling Cunningham, stated the family has been farming for many years and are
dedicated to the farm. This is not the time to sell. She has a family, works full time and still
works on the farm.
Dan Klamm, 4130 140th Street NE, has known the Vierlings for 15 years and felt it was great
to see the farm exist for 150 years. Eight years is not long. Maybe the City has had
disagreements with the Vierlings but the community should come together on this issue.
Paul Lindahl, 2560 Muhlenhardt Road, felt the farm is a beautiful setting. The Vierlings are
asking for help. It is hard for a farmer to ask for assistance. It seems like such a minor thing,
at least give them a chance. They have done a lot for the community.
Russ Dunker, 4487 Chestnut Lane, said he does not know the Vierlings well but sees Mike a
few times a year. Mike has a real passion for what he does. Dunker felt it was not
unreasonable for the Vierlings to want the tax advantages. He is in support of the Vierlings
farming for as long as they want. They are very good neighbors.
Rita Baden, 13866 Pike Lake Trail, questioned how farm land is taken out of rural density
when it is being farmed. Why does the community feel they can make these changes? If the
Vierlings are willing to farm, let them make the choice. Weare losing our open space.
L:\O 1 files\O 1 plancomm\O 1 pcminutes\mnO 1160 1 ,doc
8
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
Kansier explained the zoning is still agriculture and farming is a permitted use. The
Vierlings can continue to farm as long as they like. The Comprehensive Plan is a long term
plan to identify potential uses of property to allow the City, County and the rest of the
community to plan for things like municipal services, road systems, the park systems,
including the farm land. The City has no intention of stopping the Vierlings from farming.
The City is required to plan long term. The zoning has not changed and the City is not
requesting the amendment.
Kansier clarified the 8 years in Ag Preserve. Once the property is in the Ag Preserve
Program it does not come out until requested by the property owner. Once they make the
request the 8 year time frame starts. It is not just 8 years, it will go on until the law changes.
Kevin Shadduck, 4841 Beach Street, said the Vierlings have been great neighbors. The only
reason not to help the Vierlings farm is to perceive that the City wants to force them to sell so
the City can get a bigger tax base. It is a terrible motivation not to help a farmer.
Joe Zieska, 5316 Hampton, said he has looked out his window the last 14 years to see the
Vierling property and if they desire to farm for the next 100 or 200 years they can. But that
is not the issue. The property is zoned agriculture. He doesn't believe in the history of Prior
Lake (inaudible). To paraphrase Mr. Kelly we have to look at this logically from the facts.
First I would like to straighten out a few facts from Mr. Kelly. He stated the property was
zoned RHD (Rural High Density) - it is not. It is zoned Agriculture. The Comprehensive
Plan is RHD and CBO. He mentioned building 4,500 housing units on the land. The City
only has 3,000 houses. I don't see how he can put 4,500 in that little spot. He talks about
putting manufacturing and industrial in CBO. Those uses are not allowed. It has to be
business office park. Kelly speculated on the needed infrastructure and traffic on County
Road 42. He talks about the breakdown of County Road 42 in Bumsville. There isn't anyone
here that would tell us that 42 in Bumsville is broke down. That is why we need long range
planning. The City has to look at what the plan could possibly be used for in the future. As
the City Engineer pointed out, they oversized and put trunk sewer and water mains in to get
across County Road 42 to get to Pike Lake trail projects in anticipation of future
developments. It is only right for the homeowners who live adjacent to this property.
Anyone who has been on the Planning Commission for any length of time finds when there is
difficult rezoning problems, it is not from the land owner, it is from the adjacent property
owners. When I bought my house I never knew what was going to be there. The property
owners along County Roads 42 and 18, Pike Lake Trail will sell some day or somebody else
moves in and sees the beautiful farm and all of a sudden an office building goes up they'll
say "What happened? There was a farm before." By leaving it in the Comprehensive Plan as
potential uses somewhere in the future those people who purchase that property will know
potentially what can go in there. These are the reasons the Comprehensive Plan should be
left as is. It has nothing to do with present day land use.
Dave Baden, said the Vierlings are hard workers. The cows are good neighbors too. The
open space in Prior Lake is disappearing, we need less development. He hopes the Vierlings
will be farming for another 80 years, not just 8.
Linda Lehman, 13231 Henning Circle, said she has been working with the Vierlings for the
past 5 years on the environmental compliance for their feedlots. Mike Vierling is looking at
spending $35,000 to $65,000 to come into compliance with the feedlot. He needs to know if
L:\OI files\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
9
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
':
he will be able to farm there for the next 8 to 10 years for that issue alone. Would like the
Commissioners to allow him to continue not only for the cost issue but also for compliance
and whatever protection he needs from the Ag Preserve.
Yvonne Anderson, 13220 Pike Lake, Program Manager for the YMCA Camp and caretaker
since 1982 said the Camp has been on Pike Lake since the 1960's. At some time the YMCA
Camp will be put into a situation of the potential land use. The 80 acres they are on allows
2,500 youth each summer to come and experience the outdoors. Anderson supported the
Vierlings and asked the Commission to remember the green space.
Cindy Stark, 14730 Rosewood Road, enjoys looking over the Vierling property and Prior
Lake. The Vierling farm gives their children the opportunity to see a hard working farm.
Greg Engabos, 4931 Beach Street, appreciates what the City has done in developing the
Comprehensive Plan and understands proper planning. If it is the intent of the City of Prior
Lake to let the Vierlings continue farming, it should be demonstrated they could be put in the
best economic situation possible by allowing the Agricultural designation. Both intentions
would be met.
Jadin Bragg, Carriage Hills Development, said he listened to the Commissioners earlier
determining ifthere was hardship for a deck. He said it seems ridiculous the Commissioners
are pointing out they cannot change the Comprehensive Plan to let the Vierlings have what
they need. It is causing them economic hardship. Think about the area you live in.
Residents want to drive by a farm not high rise buildings. Bragg said he loves the fact he can
see Jeffers Pond and the cows. Don't change it.
Kenny Landherr, 14612 Rosewood Road, said from his family perspective they feel fortunate
to live next to the Vierling property and was the main reason they moved there. The bigger
issue is that it is a wonderful opportunity for his children to experience the farm.
K.R. Radin, 14211 Shore Lane, enjoys seeing the cows and felt Mike Vierling should have
the opportunity to continue farming.
The hearing was closed to the public.
Commissioner V onhof stated that since the Commissioners received a large packet of
material just before the meeting, they would like to continue the public hearing and give the
Commissioners time to review the information.
MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO
JANUARY 29,2001.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
Stamson asked for a detailed definition of Green Acres and Ag Preserve specifically the tax
details for the next packet.
A recess was called at 8: 12 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8: 19 p.m.
L:\OI files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
10
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
D. Case File #00-082 Gary Matson is requesting a preliminary plat consisting of a '
total of 0.96 acres to be subdivided into 2 lots for the existing single family dwelling and
one new single family dwelling for the property located on the north side of Centennial
Street, west of Candy Cove Trail and south of TH 13.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated January 16,2001, on
file in the office of the City Planning Department.
The purpose of the public hearing is to consider an application for a preliminary plat for the
0.94 acre site located on the north side of Centennial Street, west of Candy Cove Trail and
south of TH 13. The preliminary plat, to be known as Matson Addition, is the site of a single
family dwelling at 5366 Centennial Street. The proposed plat consists of 0.94 acres to be
subdivided into 2 lots for single family dwellings. Lot 2, Block 1, is the site of the existing
dwelling. Lot 1, Block 1, is the site of a future dwelling. The proposed lots meet or exceed
the minimum lot area and frontage requirements for the R -1 district.
The proposed preliminary plat meets the standards ofthe Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning
Ordinance. Ifthe preliminary plat is to proceed, it should be subject to the following
condition:
1. Prior to final plat approval, the developer must submit a landscaping plan as required by
Section 1007.100 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
2. A minimum 10' wide drainage and utility easement must be provided along the front and
rear lot lines of each lot, and a minimum 5 ' wide drainage and utility easement must be
provided along the side lot lines of each lot. A 15' wide drainage and utility easement
must be provided along the west lot line of Lot 1, Block 1, to maintain the existing sewer
easement.
Staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat of Matson Addition as presented and
subject to the condition listed above, or with specific changes directed by the Planning
Commission.
Atwood questioned the parkland dedication. Kansier responded. The amount will be minor.
Comments from the public:
Gary Matson, felt Jane explained the situation well.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Criego:
. Approve
Atwood, Stamson, V onhof and Lemke:
. Concurred
L:\O I files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
11
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY STAMSON, RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AS REQUESTED WITH STAFF'S
CONDITIONS.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
E. Case File #00.;.00-086 The Church of St. Michael is requesting a variance to the
maximum building wall length to building height for the new addition to St. Michael's
School on property zoned R-2 (Low to Medium Density Residential) District located at
16280 Duluth Avenue.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated January 16, 2001, on
file in the office of the City Planning Department.
The Planning Department received an application for a variance to allow the construction of
an addition to the existing St. Michael's school building on the properly located at 16280
Duluth Avenue. The proposed addition is located on the south side of the existing school,
and is 142' long and 26' high. The following variance is therefore requested:
A variance to permit a structure with a building wall length to building height ratio of
5.46: 1 rather than the maximum ratio of 4: 1 (City Code Section 1107 .2202, ~8,b).
St. Michael's school is located at the northwest quadrant of Duluth Avenue and Pleasant
Avenue. The property consists ofa combination of unplatted and platted parcels. It is in the
process of being replatted into one large parcel.
St. Michael's is in the process of expanding the school. The first phase, planned for
construction in 2001, consists of the south addition. Phase 2 is planned for construction
within the next 3 to 4 years. There are no specific plans for this second phase. Based on the
applicant's drawing, construction of the second phase also seems to require the purchase of
additional property.
The proposed request does not appear to meet the hardship criteria in that a legal alternative
exists. The applicant can redesign the west side of the addition to meet the maximum ratio of
length to height. The staff therefore recommends denial of this request.
Comments from the public:
Rollie Brouillard, Parish Administrator for the Church of St. Michael, introduced the project
architect John Nightingale.
John Nightingale, Project Manager for St. Michael's from DRL Group in Minneapolis,
explained the project and future phasing for the school. Nightingale felt adding the bump-out
would be a detriment to the building. The homeowners have been notified and if there has
not been any problems, felt St. Michael's should be able to proceed.
Atwood questioned how the bump-outs would affect the master plans. Nightingale
responded it would effect the design of the phasing and be in the way and has no function.
Atwood asked if they would be back to the drawing table. Nightingale said they would and
L:\OI files\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
12
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
effect the designer phase. Atwood questioned who sent out the notices to the neighbors.
Kansier responded staff did but St. Michael's had been holding neighborhood meetings. The
variance request was sent out 10 days before the meeting.
Lemke questioned the Phase 2 walls reducing the length. Nightingale said they were going to
be flush walls.
The hearing was closed.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Stamson:
. Staff recommends denial based on the hardship criteria. They do not meet criteria #1.
The lot cannot accommodate a building of this size.
. It is important to keep in mind this is in phases. Phase 2 is going to require buying
more land. That current property is not on the market and outside St. Michael's
control. This lot as proposed cannot accommodate the entire project. It is extremely
small for the use.
. It is important to note this lot is 3 acres to house an elementary school. In passing 4
to 5 elementary schools on the way home, the smallest probably sat on 20 acres. It is
on a narrow block, constricted on three sides by public streets. The school and
church has been located there since the early 1900' s. It was one of the first buildings
in town and predates any zoning ordinances in the City.
. For those reasons the hardship criteria has been met.. This is largely outside their
control. The property is unique. .
. The addition provides a valuable asset to the community.
. The problem can be mitigated by adding a condition that any future addition
eliminates this condition. So ifSt. Michael's does add on in the future it will be
eliminated. The final phase will not need a variance. Recognize that this is a phasing
proposal.
. It could also be mitigated by additional landscaping in the short term.
. This is a unique situation.
Criego:
. The east side of the new proposed building meets the criteria because of the
entryway. Kansier said it does meet the criteria and explained the ordinance
requirements for the bump-out.
. The homes on the east side are going to see a long flat building.
. Understand the phasing, but there is no guarantee that this will be done. How can the
Commission legitimately give a variance for something that may not be done? It is
an economic issue and predicated on a lot of things out ofSt. Michael's control.
. There are situations like this with homes and in the past have been very stringent that
the Commission did not want long walls to be built without some breaks. The
ordinance was even modified the ordinance to reduce the impact to make it less
prohibited.
. Cannot legitimately say yes to this variance.
. Serious concern for long flat walls and the appearance of them for the neighbors.
L:\O I files\O I planeomm\O I pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doe
13
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
Lemke:
· It speaks volumes that the neighbors are not present to object. If they do not object, I
will not object. St. Michael's say they have a master plan to expand.
· To build a 4x4 foot requirement that does not need to be satisfied after the end of
phase 2, maybe not the proper way to look at it from a planning standpoint, but
inclined to let them build it.
Atwood:
. Sees no problem granting the variance.
. The neighbors are not close.
. It is not attractive as it stands now. The material will be Class I.
. Trust that St. Michael's will go forward.
. Agreeable to request.
V onhof:
. Most elementary schools sit on 20 to 25 acres, minimum. This is an extremely tight
base.
· Believed the hardship criteria had been met.
. Suggest this condition be eliminated with any future phasing.
MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO APPROVE THIS VARIANCE
WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION THAT ANY FUTURE ADDITION ELIMINATE
THIS VARIANCE REQUIREMENT.
Vote taken indicated ayes by Stamson, Atwood, Vonhof, and Lemke. Nay by Criego.
MOTION CARRIED.
Kansier clarified the Motion by stating the Commissioners would like staff to prepare a
Resolution to the Motion for the next meeting.
5. Old Business:
6. New Business:
A. Case File #99-086 Mark Liesener is requesting a one year extension of the
approved Variance Resolutions 99-025PC and 99-026PC for the property identified as
Lot 13, Block 2, Titus Second Addition.
Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman presented the Planning Report dated January 16,2001,
on file in the office of the Planning Department.
The Planning Department received a written request for a one year extension of an approved
variance from Mark Liesener. On December 13, 1999, the Planning Commission approved a
variance to the structure setback requirement. This variance expired on December 13,2000.
The request to extend the variance was submitted on December 6, 2000, after notification by
this office ofthe impending expiration. Variance Resolution 99-026PC, originally adopted
on December 13, 1999, approved a variance to the minimum structure setback for a single
family dwelling. The variance is described as follows:
L:\OI files\OI plancomm\O Ipcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
14
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
\,
A 70 foot variance to permit a 30 foot structure setback from the Ordinary High Water
Mark (OHWM) elevation of a tributary stream rather than the required 100 foot [City
Code Subsection 1104.301: (3) Setback Requirements: Tributary Rivers].
The Planning Staff reviewed the applicant's request for a one year extension of time. The lot
in question is a nonconforming lot of record. A variance is required before any construction
will be allowed on the property.
On October 9, 2000, The Planning Commission approved a request for a time extension of
one year for Variance Resolution 99-021PC. Resolution 00-014PC granted the applicant
until September 27,2001, for commencing construction on the subject property or the
variance will expire. Staff recommends a time extension for this variance request coincide
with the time extension granted on the previous request, on September 27,2001. Ifa building
permit is not approved prior to September 27,2001, this variance will also expire.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Lemke:
· Sounds reasonable.
Atwood:
· Questioned ifthe new owner (Daniel Pinkevich) had contacted the City. Horsman
said he has not recently talked to him. Originally Pinkevich was planning to build in
the spring, but does not know if that has changed.
· September 27 is reasonable.
Stamson, Criego and V onhof:
. Concurred.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD, RECOMMENDING EXTENSION OF
THE VARIANCES TIEING THEM TO THE SEPTEMBER 27,2001 DATE.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
7. Announcements and Correspondence:
· Counci1member Jim Ericson has been appointed as liaison for the Planning
Commission.
· Commissioners should start thinking of workshop issues and get back to staff.
· Criego suggested talking about the zoning implemented a few years ago from low-
density to medium density.
· The new Subdivision Ordinance will be coming up soon.
· Criego suggested looking at the rezoning districts.
L:\O 1 files\O 1 plancomm\O 1 pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
15
Planning Commission Meeting
January 16,2001
\-;
· Vaughn will not be at the next meeting.
8. Adjournment:
The meeting adjourned at 8:56 p.m.
Jane Kansier
Planning Coordinator
Connie Carlson
Recording Secretary
L:\OI files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mnO 1160 I.doc
16
PLANNING REPORT
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
4A
CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO
CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE VIERLING
PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24,
TOWNSHIP 115, RANGE 22 (Case File #00-084)
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
_X_ YES _NO-N/A
FEBRUARY 12, 2001
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION:
Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling have filed an application for a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAH 42
between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18. The proposal is to amend the 2020
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential)
and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on
320 acres ofland.
The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing on January 16,2001.
At that meeting, the applicants' representatives distributed a packet of information. The
Planning Commission continued the public hearing in order to review this information.
REVIEW OF KELLY & FAWCETT LETTER
The letter submitted by the firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P.A., representatives of the
applicants, contains several reasons they believe the Comprehensive Plan should be
amended. The following is the staffs analysis of these reasons,
Historical Reasons:
The letter suggests the Vierling farm should be preserved for its historical value. There
are no structures of historical significance on this site. Farmland, in itself, does not have
historical value. In fact, on page 4 of the letter, the applicants note the land will be
developed at some time in the future.
1:\OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-084\00084pc2.doc
Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
-
,
L02istical Reasons:
1. The City is not prepared for High Density or Office Parks
The letter suggests the City is unprepared for development of the Vierling property.
The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to identify future land uses. In conjunction
with this, the plan also identifies potential road connections and allows the City to
plan for the extension of utilities and other public services. Specific site development
occurs at the time ofthe development ofthe property.
The letter also states the proposed zoning of this property will also affect the real
estate taxes. First of all, the property is currently zoned A (Agriculture) and the City
has no plans to change that designation at this time. Although the Comprehensive
Plan identifies this site for other uses, the Zoning Ordinance recognizes the existing
use and investment in the property. Any change to the current Zoning designation of
this property would most likely be initiated by the property owner. Second, the
attached letter from Leroy Arnoldi, Director of Taxation for Scott County, notes taxes
are based on the actual use of the property, not the Zoning classification. As long as
the property continues to be used agriculturally, it will be taxed on that basis. This
letter also suggests the financial implication of removal of this property from the
Agricultural Preserve Program is $1.50 per acre, or about $480 per year. We have
requested a more detailed analysis from Scott County, which should be available at
the meeting.
a. Water Service. The letter states water service is not available to serve this site.
In fact, trunk water mains are located in CSAH 42, directly in front of this
property, and can be extended to serve this site. The City has also received a
permit to construct a new well near The Wilds development, and will commence
construction this year.
b. Sewer Service. The letter also states sewer service is not available to serve this
site. Trunk sewer mains are also located in CSAH 42, directly in front of this
property, and can be extended to serve this site. Furthermore, the letter states this
property is not within the MUSA. As stated in the previous staff report, the City
does not have a fixed MUSA. Rather, the City has utilized an undesignated
MUSA. This approach allocates a certain number of acres for development. The
City has the flexibility to determine which land may be used as part of that
allocation. The Comprehensive Plan identified a Primary Area of MUS A Acreage
Allocation, based on the availability of municipal services. This property was
included within that allocation.
c. Traffic Considerations. The letter states CSAH 42 is not capable of handling the
traffic generated by the development of this site. CSAH 42 is a 4-lane highway,
classified as an arterial street. On the east side of the property is CSAH 18, which
was also recently approved, and which is classified as a minor arterial. The
1:\OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-084\OO084pc2.doc
Page 2
.
.
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on CSAH 42 is approximately 13,000 trips, and the
ADT on CSAH 18 is approximately 3,500 trips. The roads are designed to
accommodate up to 27,000 ADT and 7,500 trips respectively. The land use
designation of this property was based; in part, on the fact it is accessible from
these two roads. As the property north of CSAH 42 develops, Pike Lake Trail
will be upgraded, and an internal street system will be designed to accommodate
the traffic on this site.
2. Community buildings on this site.
The letter contends the City is interested in the Vierling property for use as a high
school site, a library/resource center and a fire station. The School District has
identified a location for the new high school in Savage. The City of Prior Lake
completed construction of the new library in the downtown area in 1999. Finally, the
City is planning a fire station on the north side of Prior Lake in the future. All sites
considered for the station have been on the south side of CSAH 42.
3. No Population Growth.
The letter states there is no need for additional housing in Prior Lake. The population
of Prior Lake has increased approximately 40% since 1990. In 2000, the City issued
a: record number of building permits for new dwelling units (276). An inventory of
vacant lots indicates the City has about 1-2 years supply available for building.
Finally, in a recent report on the availability of rental housing in Prior Lake, Scott
County estimates a 1 % vacancy rate. Other studies by the Metropolitan Council have
indicated there is a need for additional housing in the metropolitan area, including
Scott County and Prior Lake.
4. Orderly Development.
The letter states the Vierlings need time to develop an orderly plan for the
development of their property. The existing Comprehensive Plan provides them with
that time, as well as with an idea ofthe future uses ofthe site.
Environmental Reasons
1. The City's Mission to Protect the Natural Environment.
The City is committed to protecting the natural environment; however, this
commitment does not preclude development. The City protects the environment
through regulations such as wetland preservation, tree preservation, open space
requirements and other ordinance requirements. The City is actually able to exercise
more environmental control through the development process than on agricultural
land.
1:\OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-084\00084pc2.doc
Page 3
.;
The plan also seeks to maintain a variety of residential densities. This is done on a
citywide basis, not parcel by parcel. The designation of this site as High Density
Residential seeks to balance the density overall.
The Minneapolis Star Tribune article cited by the letter also notes that all of the
development that has occurred in the State of Minnesota since 1982 has decreased
land classified as rural by only 1.1 percent. The article quotes University of
Minnesota geographer Fraser Hart, who states, "Most lost farmland was in marginal
agricultural counties with soils of low inherent fertility and topography unsuited to
modem farm machinery."
2. The City's Mission to Preserve Open Space.
The letter states the Comprehensive Plan states that "major open space should be
planned and provided" and that "preservation and treatment of open space shall be a
major consideration in planning and review of all types of development." The letter
is incorrect in stating that current land use designations of this property would not
allow the provision of open space. The City Comprehensive Plan has identified
several locations for neighborhood and community parks. In addition, the City
Zoning and Subdivision regulations include required open space provisions for
development and parkland dedication requirements.
In a letter to neighbors, dated January 8, 2001, Kelly & Fawcett also state that enrollment
in the Agricultural Preserve Program is for a period of 8 years. This is not entirely
correct. Minnesota Statutes ~473H.08 states the duration of the Agricultural Preserve
continues until either the landowner or the City initiates the expiration of the program.
Once expiration is initiated, the property remains in the preserve program for 8 years.
The City may only initiate expiration if the comprehensive plan is amended so the land is
no longer designated for long-term agricultural use.
In 1993, the property owner initiated the removal ofthe east 240 acres of the site from the
program. The land will be officially removed in 2001. The Comprehensive Plan
designation for this area was first amended in 1995, and identified this property as R-HD,
C-BO and PI (Planned Industrial). This designation was based, in part, on the property
owners' decision to remove the property from the Agricultural Preserve Program. In
1999, the plan was updated following a public hearing. At that time, this property was
designated for R-HD and C-BO uses.
ANALYSIS OF APPLICATION:
This property is presently zoned A (Agricultural). The east 160 acres of the site are
designated as C-BO (Business Office Park) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Map, and the west 160 acres of the site is designated as R-HD (High Density
Residential). The applicants have requested these designations be changed to Rural
Density.
1:\OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-084\00084pc2.doc
Page 4
..
The Rural Density classification is intended for land where urban services are
unavailable. Even this designation is intended to accommodate future urban
development.
The Agricultural Preserve program was established in 1980 to preserve long-term
agricultural areas in the Metropolitan area, and to recognize farmland as a long-term use.
Under the law, land is no longer eligible for the program when the Comprehensive Plan
no longer identifies the land for long-term agricultural uses.
In 2000, the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be
reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program. The City refused this request on the
basis the property no longer qualified for program participation because it failed to meet
the statutory requirements. The current Comprehensive Plan designation of the property
does not preclude the use ofthis land for agricultural purposes. The City has no objection
to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax
protection for existing farmland. The City also has no plans to rezone this property from
its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners.
The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term
agriculture has been in place since 1995. The applicants have not demonstrated any need
to change this designation.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval ofthe Comprehensive Plan Amendment as requested.
2. Recommend denial ofthe request.
3. Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning staff recommends Alternative #2.
ACTION REQUIRED:
A motion and second to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the
Rural Density designation is required.
EXHIBITS:
1. Location Map
2. Copy of Kelly & Fawcett Letters
3. Copy of Letter from Leroy Arnoldi
4. Zoning Map
1:\OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-084\00084pc2.doc
Page 5
Kelly & Fawcett, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
,[
2350 PIPER JAFFRA Y PLAZA
444 CEDAR STREET
SAINT PAUL, MN 55101
PATRICK 1. KELLY
SONG LO FAWCETT
STEPHEN KELLY
SIALO
CHAD D. LEMMONS
KATHLEEN M. LOUCKS
ROBERT 1. FOWLER
Of Counsel:
JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR.
MCGUIGAN & HOLLY, P.L.C.
(651) 224-3781
Facsimile (651) 223-8019
E-Mail: kelfawcett@qwest.net
January 8, 2001
Dear Neighbors:
Please be advised that Kelly & Fawcett, P.A. represents the Vierlings who live at 13985 Pike Lake
Trail, N.E. and 14310 Pike Lake Trail, N.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota. As you are aware, the Vierling
family has requested the City of Prior Lake Planning Commission to amend its Comprehensive Use
Plan to re-enroll their property north of County Road 42 into the Agricultural Preserve Program.
Enrollment ofthe property in the Agricultural Preserve Program would allow it to remain farm land
for a period of eight years. After the eight year period, the Vierlings would be required to re-enroll
in the program. A public hearing before the Plannirrg Commission is scheduled for January 16,
2001 at 6:30 p.m. at the Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road, Prior Lake,
Minnesota.
On behalf ofthe Vierling family, I would like to request your support in this matter. Enrollment in
the Agricultural Preserve Program is very important to the Vierling family because the property has
been in their family for decades and they seek to preserve it as farmland. The Vierlings currently
farm the property and wish to continue farming. The Vierling property is one ofthe few remaining
large tracts ofland within the Prior Lake city limits. The Vierlings need your support in obtaining
this designation for the property.
If you have any questions, piease do not nt:sitak to contact me at the above number. Thank yeu for
your attention and anticipated support.
Respectfully yours,
KELLY & FAWCETT, P.A.
SVIj lo {twu,/D
Song Lo Fawcett
cc: Mike and Becky Vierling
Helen Vierling
Edward Vierling
Kelly & Fawcett., P.A.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
.
2350 PIPER JAFFRA Y PLAZA
444 CEDAR STREET
SAINT PAUL, MN 55]0]
JAN t 6 2001
PATRICKJ. KELLY
SONG LO FA WCETT
STEPHEN KELLY
SIALO
CHAD D. LEMMONS
KATHLEEN M. LOUCKS
ROBERT J. FOWLER
Of Counsel:
JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR.
MCGUIGAN & HOLLY, P.L.C.
(651) 224-3781
Facsimile (651) 223-8019
E-Mail: keIfawcett@qwest.net
January 15,2001
.l\,fembers of the Planning Commission
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Southeast
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Dear Members of the Planning Commission:
The Firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P.A. represents the Vierling Family. As you are aware, the
Vierling family has requested you to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan ("Comp. Plan") from
the current designations ofR-HD (High Density Residential) and C-BO (Business Office Park)
to Rural Residential Density of their parcels. This request by the Vierlings should be granted for
a number of historical, environmental and logistical reasons set forth in this letter. Hopefully,
the information that we provide you in this letter and the corresponding exhibits will allow you
to approve the Compo Plan amendment as requested by the Vierlings.
A. Historical Reasons
The Compo Plan should be amended because of the large amount of history that encompasses the
Vierling family farm. The VierJing family farm is over 150 years old and has been a part of Prior
Lake since the settlement of the city. The Vierlings have cared for and farmed this land for that
150 years. Since these parcels has been in the family for several generations, it has a great
sentimental value to the Vierling family which is why they want to preserve it, so that future
generations of Vierlings may take part in their family tradition. The City of Prior Lake must pay
special respect to the significance the property holds for the Vierling family as its legacy in
Minnesota, Scott County and Prior Lake.
The City also has an interest in preserving the Vierling parcels for its own historical reasons.
The Vierling farm is one of the oldest "businesses" in the City because it existed before the City's
incorporation. The City has aiso expressed that it is interested in preserving history. It its Compo
Plan, the City states that it wishes to "incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum
feasible extent." (Comp. Plan at 25, 26 and 42). The City specifically notes in the Compo Plan
that areas of the Vierling parcels (Prior Lake) are considered to be "the natural resource area of
Letter to Planning Commission
from Patrick J. Kelly and
Chad D. Lemmons
Page 2
January 15, 2001
\-
greatest historical significance." (Comp. Plan at 117) (emphasis added). Based on its values
expressed above in its Compo Plan and the fact ~hat the Vierling property represents a part of
Prior Lake's heritage, it should be preserved by the City.
B. Logistical
1. City is not currently prepared for High Density or Office Parks
The proposed zoning of the Vierling parcels represent intensive uses of the property and would
best be implemented by an overall plan for orderly development. The real estate taxes which
would result from the proposed zoning could force piecemeal development of the Vierling
parcels. This is not in the best interests of either the City or the Vierlings. In order to solve this
problem, the City should designate the parcels Rural/Residential density. Land is often
designated Rural/Residential Density in order to preserve large tracts of land which can
eventually accommodate orderly planned urban development. (Comp. Plan at 44). In addition,
the City can create the option of parenthetically indicating other classifications for
Rural/Residential Density land. (Comp. Plan at 44). The alternative categories reflect the City's
determination that the property would be eventually conducive to some urban, rather than rural
use. (Comp. Plan at 44). In any event, the City will be amending the Compo Plan after ten years,
which will then allow re-evaluation of the property. Since the City does not currently have water
service, sewer service, proper transportation service to the Vierling parcels, this option would be
the best option for the City.
a. Water Service
The City has not prepared the Vierling parcels for development because water mains do not even
exist to serve them at this time (Watermain Map). In fact, the water mains are not a part of the
City's immediate plan. They are a part of the 20 Year Capital Improvement Plan instead.
Without immediate improvements, present well capacity can not support the immediate
development of the Vierling parcels because the Department of Natural Resources will not allow
any additional withdrawals from the Jordan-Sandstone aquifer and also has concerns about the
City utilizing the Mount SimonlHinckely aquifer. Therefore, the City would have difficulties
obtaining water service for the Vierling parcels in the near future which would be required to
make it developable.
b. Sewer Service
At present, the City has no sewer service infrastructure in place to serve the Vierling parcels
because they are outside the present MUSA line. (Existing Sanitary Sewer Map). The current
MUSA line is entirely within the City limits but it does not include all of the land within the
City limits, including a majority of the Vierling parcels. (Comp. Plan at 254). The Compo
Plan states that development of land within the MUSA will require the extension of municipal
sanitary sewer services. (Comp. Plan at 254). Land outside the MUSA cannot be connected to
Letter to Planning Commission
from Patrick J. Kelly and
Chad D. Lemmons
Page 3
January 15,2001
. .
the municipal sewer system and must be developed with larger individual lots to accommodate
onsite wastewater treatment. (Comp. Plan at 254). Therefore, because there is no sewer service
to the Vierling parcels, the City is not capable of developing the Vierling parcels at this time.
c. Traffic Considerations
Even if water service and sewer service are not taken under consideration, the Vierling parcels
still faces significant problems with traffic if they are deemed High Density Residential and
Business or Office Park. County Road 42, the main thoroughfare through the Vierling parcels,
is not capable of safely handling the additional traffic that development of the Vierling would
generate. Currently County Road 42 is only four-lane from Ferndale Avenue to Highway 13.
(Comp. Plan at 134). In addition, the City admits in its Compo Plan that there is a "limited
availability of transit service," which means that personal automobiles are the only means of
getting around in the City. (Comp. Plan at 154). Since the roads surround the Vierling parcels
are not able to handle the amount of traffic that High Density Residential and Business Office
Park would bring, the City should not develop the land until these changes are made.
2. The City wishes to build community buildings on the Vierling Parcels
If the Vierling parcels are rezoned and developed, the City will lose its chance to build on the
property. The City is currently looking to build a new high school, a Library/Resource Center
and a Fire Station (Comp. Plan at 37 and 200). Ifthe parcels are rezoned, the City will not have
the time that it needs to plan the construction of these buildings because they will be immediately
sold to commercial developers because the real estate taxes from the proposed zoning would
force piecemeal development of the property. However, if the City designates the property
rural/residential, it would have the opportunity to have some additional time in considering
purchasing the parcels for its own use.
3. No New Housing is Needed at this Time, Population Has Not Grown
The City has no need for Residential High Density property at this time. In its Compo Plan, the
City states that its population increase has stabilized since 1990 and its desire for a rate of
development may even be lower than private interests would prefer (Comp. Plan at 271 and 124).
In general, the City states that its housing supply is adequate, it already has a reasonable supply
of single family, duplex, and townhouse rentals, a significant amount of affordable and moderate
cost housing remains available (Comp. Plan at 101 and 102). However, the typical uses of urban
high density consist of two-family dwellings, townhouses, apartments, and other designs,
including single family manufactured dwellings and single family dwellings by conditional use
p~rmit and/or Planned Unit Development. (Comp. Plan at 49). Based on the language in its
Compo Plan, these types of dwellings are not needed presently by the City. Therefore, the
Vierling parcels should be designated residential/rural until this need is more evident.
-- -..- -- ------ --..---------------
Letter to Planning Commission
from Patrick J. Kelly and
Chad D. Lemmons
Page 4
January 15, 2001
. .
4. Orderly Development
The Vierlings understand that as Prior Lake continues to develop, farming will become
economically unviable. To prepare for this, the Vierlings need time to develop an orderly plan
for the development of their property. By granting the amendment (and subsequent Ag Preserve
status), the Vierlings and the City have time to agree on orderly development ofthe Vierling
Property. Denial of this amendment (and Ag Preserve status) increases the pressure on the
Vierlings to develop in a haphazard manner resulting in an ill-conceived development.
B. Environmental
1. The City's Mission to Protect the Natural Environment
The City, in its Mission Statement and in its Compo Plan, states that it is committed to
"environmentally sensitive community development." (Comp. Plan at 25 and A-I). The Mission
Statement of the City reads "[t]he City of Prior Lake is committed to serving the common good
of its residents by promoting community values, environmentally sensitive community
development, robust business growth, financial stability, safety, and diverse recreational
opportunities." (Comp. Plan at A-I) (emphasis added). This Mission Statement is included in
the Compo Plan under Objective Number 5 which provides for "conservation and protection of.
the natural environment." (Comp. Plan at 32) (emphasis added). With very little development,
forests, small wetlands and plenty of pastureland, the Vierling parcels represent an ideal
preservation ofthe natural environment of the City. By amending its Compo Plan to zone the
Vierling parcels as Rural Residential, the City would be able to fulfill its objectives of preserving
the natural environment because the maximum rural density is one dwelling unit per 40 acres.
(Comp. Plan at 44). This designation would allow the City to preserve the forests, wetlands and
pastureland that give Prior Lake its greatest appeal to its residents and visitors.
In addition, by designating the Vierling parcels as Rural Residential, the City would be fulfilling
another one of its objectives stated in its Compo Plan. The City states in its Compo Plan that one
of its objectives that it wants to "maintain a variety of residential densities." (Comp. Plan at 25
and 113). By zoning the Vierlings' property as office park and residential high density, very
little rural density property will be left in the City, in fact only one area on the outskirts of the
City would remain rural density. The City zoned large amounts of area in the City limits as
Urban Low/Medium Density and Urban High Density (Comp. Land Use Map). It is also
important to note that other cities and counties have had great success in preserving a mixture of
densities. Dakota County's mixture of towns, cities and farms have had a great appeal, resulting
in tremendous population gains. (Metropolitan Council, A FARMER FIGHTS TO SAVE
AGRICULTURAL LAND, see www.metrocouncil.org/mnsmartgrowth/citizens_stelzel.htm; and
Peterson, David, "Loss of rural land accelerating in state, study finds," Minneapolis Star
Tribune, January 11,2001). Therefore, if it maintains the zoning recommended by the Compo
Plan, the City will not be meeting one of its key objectives, maintaining a variety of residential
densities.
Letter to Planning Commission
from Patrick J. Kelly and
Chad D. Lemmons
2. The City's Mission to Preserve Open Spaces.
Page 5
January 15, 2001
By designating the Vierling property as rural re.sidential, the City would create open spaces
which are called for by its Compo Plan. In its Compo Plan, the City states that "major open
spaces should be planned an provided" and that "preservation and treatment of open space shall
be a major consideration in planning and review of all types of development within the City."
(Comp. Plan at 38 and 106) (emphasis added). A large portion of the Vierling parcels has been
designated by the city as either High Density Residential or Business Office Park. (Comp. Land
Use Map). The City defines High Density Residential as "densities up to 30 units per acres."
(Comp. Plan at 48). It defines Business Office Park as "business and office park; corporate
headquarters; and professional and administrative offices; and limited research, development and
manufacturing facilities." (Comp. Plan at 58). These types ofland use of the Vierling parcels
would not allow for open spaces to be provided. The Rural/Residential designation calls for one
dwelling unit per 40 acres, which would provide for this desired open space. By designating the
property Rural/Residential, the City would be achieving its objectives set forth in its Compo Plan
by preserving open spaces because rural/residential calls for one dwelling unit per 40 acres.
With very little property designated by the City as rural/residential, giving the Vierling property
this designation is the only way for the City to maintain its objective of preserving open spaces.
Based on the above and the attached Exhibits, the Vierlings' request to amend the Compo Plan
should be granted because of historical, environmental and logistical reasons~ Thank you for
your time and consideration.
Respectfully yours,
KELLY & FAWCETT, P.A.
I~ ft--
Patrick J. Kelly
Chad D. Lemmons
Appendix
Compo Plan
Selected 2020 Compo Plan sections
pp.25-26,32,37-38,42,44,48-49,58, 101-102, 106, 113, 117, 124, 134, 154,200,254-
255,271, A-I-A-2
Maps
Compo Land Use Plan Map, December 28,1999
City of Prior Lake Land Use Plan Map, Fig 4-1, p. 129
Primary Area of MUSA Acreage Allocation Map, dated December 29, 1999
Comprehensive Water Plan Map, Ex. 8-3
Watermain Map, Fig. 8-1
Sewer Comprehensive Plan Map, Fig. 7-1
Existing Sanitary Sewer System Map
Articles
Metropolitan Council, A FARMER FIGHTS TO SA VE AGRICULTURAL LAND, see
www.metrocouncil.org/mnsmartgrowth/citizens_stelzel.htm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Peterson, David, "Loss of rural land accelerating in state, study finds," Minneapolis Star
Tribune, January 11,2001
Neighbors
Email from Kathleen and David Sandvik, dated January 12,2001
Letter from Michael & Linda Smith, dated January 11,2001
Letter from Kerry Smith, dated January 11,2001
Letter from Karen J. (Koskelin) Lucy, dated January 11,2001
. ",.~"
SCOTT COUNTY
FINANCE DIVISION
TAXATION DEPARTMENT
200 FOURTH AVENUE WEST
SHAKOPEE,~ 55379
(612) 496-8115
Fax: (612) 496-8135
lamoldi@co.scott.mn.us
http://www.co.scott.mn.us
-.
.
LEROY.T. ARNOLDI
DEPARTMENT OF TAXA nON DIRECTOR
January 18,2001
Ralph Teschner
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Taxable classifications
Dear Ralph:
As a follow up to our conversation relative to property tax classification, agricultural property is
assessed as such, regardless of zoning, if it is used as a farming operation. Agricultural property
enjoys the lowest rate of taxation. Agricultural property can also be classified as "Green Acres"
thus enabling the deferment of special assessments. In addition, upon timely application the
property can be-placed into "Agricultural Preserve", resulting in the potential of three references
to agricultural property.
What does this mean in tax language??
Agricultural classification:
The lowest taxable classification of property
Green Acres:
A subset of agricultural classification. Generally resulting
in a ten percent reduction in market value from the regular
Agricultural classification.
Agricultural Preserve:
Agricultural property would be eligible for an additional
credit of $1.50 per acre.
I trust this will shed some light on a portion of the classification used for property taxes. If you
have any questions feel free to call.
Sincerely,
~
Leroy T. Arnoldi
Director of Taxation, Scott County
t .OJ
, n
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
MINNESOT A
2020
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ADOPTED BY THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL, APRIL, 1999
APPROVED BY THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL, NOVEMBER, 1999
(..r
,
"
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
, ~: . , ~
A.
GOAL: SUITABLE HOUSING AND ENVIRONMENT
(
Encourage the development of suitable housing in a desirable environment.
OBJECTIVE No.1: Provide opportunities for a variety of affordable high quality
housing.
POLICIES:
a. Codes and ordinances relating to development, redevelopment, and
maintenance of housing shall be adopted and periodically reviewed to
ensure specific direction is provided regarding affordable uses in each
district and regarding minimum development standards.
b. Review annually the current and planned programs of the Scott County
Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
c. Maintain development standards and housing policies that allow for low
and moderate cost housing opportunities.
d. Develop and consider for adoption a code enforcement program for
existing housing.
e. Develop and maintain regulations that permit a mix of housing types,
sizes and price ranges to be provided throughout the City.
(
OBJECTIVE No.2: Maintain a choice of and encourage development of quality
residential environments.
POLICIES:
a. Maintain a variety of residential densities (dwelling units per acre).
b. Ensure that public services and on-site improvements are completed at
.. . the time of residential deYelopment.~~~_""~~~~,~"._._~._,,",_~~,.~.._._._._____ _~~__
c. The burden of a satisfactory transition from one density or dwelling type
to another is the rests with the developer seeking development plan
approval.
d. Discourage new residential subdivisions in isolated areas that have little
or no potential to either develop into a viable neighborhood or to
assimilate with an established neighborhood.
e. Consideration of development plans for multiple dwellings in areas so
designated on the Land Use Guide Plan should include the following
design-related items:
(1) New developments should not isolate existing single family
dwellings by inhibiting pedestrian and/or vehicular access. (
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 2
Page 25
.
C'
(
(
(2) New development completely surrounded by single family
dwellings, should be discouraged in favor of large scale plannea unit
developments which are more conducive to a mix of housing styles
with shared amenities.
(3) There should b~ convenient access to collector and arterial streets
and to available transit so to not unduly contribute to congestion on
local residential streets.
(4) Large common open areas may provide an effective transitional use
to other uses.
(5) Location near permanent public and private open spaces may
compensate for the impact of the higher density.
f. Create and enhance neighborhoods that provide parks and open spaces,
public access to natural amenities located on and adjacent to the site, and
pedestrian linkages throughout and among adjacent neighborhoods.
g. Incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum feasible
extent.
h. Provide pedestrian access to commercial and industrial centers, public
lands, and schools.
1. Avoid designs that isolate neighborhoods. Provide traffic or pedestrian
circulation within and between developments.
J. Avoid or mitigate encroachment by incompatible land uses which can
have a negative impact on the residential living environment. Mitigation
measures include, but are not limited to, the use of open space, berms,
dense landscaping vegetation, and similar buffers.
k. Allow higher density multiple dwelling housing in areas within close
proximity of existing support services and facilities, and where there is
adequate access to collector and arterial streets.
1.,...~~~~.!!~~~-:~~y.~l~E!!1:~!..!t!~!ll~~~..~.~~i~_f~~J.I:1!~~_~1.!~h__~_l?llffe:ring,
screening, and spatial separation from collector and arterial streets; and
from anticipated adverse environmental impacts including, but not
limited to, noise and air pollution.
m. Link neighborhoods to each other, and to parks, schools and commercial
centers via local streets or pedestrian trails.
n. Ensure subdivisions are designed to avoid direct private drive access
from and to major collector and arterial streets.
o. Promote innovative subdivision design and housing products through
the use of the planned unit development process and similar techniques.
p. Avoid locating high density housing to primarily serve as a buffer or as
a land use suited for absorbing negative impacts of adjacent land uses.
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 2
Page 26
('
g. Promote proactive rather than reactive public safety measures through
regular preparation of a five-year public safety strategic plan. '
h. Work cooperatively with the school district to determine the pedestrian
needs of the student population and develop safe walking routes to
school as needed. - ~ -. .
1. Encourage the consideration of appropriate crime control measures in
the design and construction of public and private buildings.
OBJECTIVE No.4: Enact and maintain policies and ordinances to ensure the
safety and preservation of property.
POLICIES:
a. Require high standards of design and materials used for all structures.
b. Maintain effective inspection services to ensure compliance with
development and building codes.
c. Ensure that all properties and structures are adequately maintained.
d. Provide for fees to cover cost of development and preservation services.
e. Identify in advance the need for redevelopment of existing residential
structures and plan for such action.
(
OBJECTIVE No.5: Provide for conservation and protection of the natural
environment.
POLICIES:
a. Provide adequate regulations to prevent the development or existence of
any industrial or commercial endeavor which will, through its operation,
create a hazard to the environment.
b. Require all developers to retain the natural environment as much as
--'possible'such as-lliepreservaflonofdesirabletrees;'sliriibs;'land' forms, ,
swamps, and ponding areas.
c. Effectively and uniformly regulate the development of structures and
other land uses in or near flood plain and drainage areas.
d. Nonconforming land uses should be eliminated over time.
e. Develop and maintain communications with school district to ensure
proper location of educational structures.
f. Require that any waste disposal or processing facility meets or exceeds
all federal, state, and local requirements, and be located in an area which
will not jeopardize future development of the City.
(
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 2
Page 32
E. GOAL: HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
Create an environment in which all citizens have the opportunity to develop their full
potential.
OBJECTIVE No.1: Encour3:ge tlie development of a broad range of educational
and learning opportunities for persons of all ages.
POLICIES:
a. Coordinate with the school district in school site selection.
b. Encourage joint development and utilization of education, recreation,
and social service facilities and services.
c. A library should be retained within the City unless an affordable
regional facility can be provided elsewhere that provides equal or better
service.
d. Encourage the location of preschool and day care facilities in the vicinity
ofmajor activity and employment centers.
OBJECTIVE No.2: Promote leisure time opportunities and experiences which are
rewarding for the individual and families.
POLICIES:
General
a. Establish and maintain a comprehensive park and trail systems plan;
efforts should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and recreation
industry objectives.
b. Park construction and maintenance should be aggressive and completed
in a timely fashion.
c. Develop a year-round system of recreation programs which appeals to
all citizens of the community.
d. Periodically conduct research and surveys to1deritify- cost effective ways
of responding to community leisure needs.
e. Major sites for park and recreation purposes should be acquired in
advance of their actual need to assure a desirable location in relation to
the area to be served.
f. Establish and maintain a park and open space land dedication policy for
new subdivisions.
g. Acquisition and development of land for parks and trails should take into
consideration potential conflicts with adjacent land uses and on-going
maintenance costs.
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 2
Page 37
(
(
(
(:.
(
(
h. City funds should be available for land acquisition in those cases where
the Comprehensive Park Plan requires more open space than the
developer is required to dedicate.
Nei~hborhood Level
1. Each neighborhood identified by this Plan should contain a centrally
located park within walking distance of all homes, oriented to small
child and parent activities rather than to organized athletic activities
J. Facilities should be jointly shared with elementary schools where
possible. Programs should reflect consideration of neighborhood needs
and desires and should take maximum advantage of site capabilities.
Community Level
k. Major public open space and activity centers should be made available
within each quadrant of the City, not only for environmental contrast
and passive recreation, but for those major organized active recreation
and indoor group programs which cannot practically be conducted at
school centers.
1. Major open spaces should be planned and provided, notwithstanding
facilities owned or planned by other jurisdictions, and the plans should
incorporate a variety of natural physical elements though not necessarily
within every park area.
m. Since the passive open space involved in City parks should be oriented
to the unique natural features of the land which help establish the
character for each quadrant of the city, a central location in each
quadrant for City open space is not essential.
n. If location and size permit, neighborhood park facilities can be
incorporated into the design and development of a community park.
o. A large nature-study preserve should be provided, possibly, though not
necessarily as part of a City park. Small neighborhood preserves should
be acquired through the land development process.
-_. -.,-..-....'" .-.-.. -..--- - - --- - ._. .------.-..--.,- .-.- .-.- -~
p. A system of trailways should be developed in the City to link major
areas of interest with special attention given to separation of pedestrian
and bicycle traffic from vehicular traffic.
q. The City should make plans to either acquire or develop desired
facilities which happen to be privately owned as principal uses, rather
than assuming those recreation facilities will continue.
r. The preservation and treatment of open space shall be major considera-
tion in planning and review of all types of development within the City.
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 2
Page 38
DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA
These objectives and criteria are intended to guide residential development and
redevelopment throughout the City; they complement the objectives and the development location
criteria for the respective residential areas described in this Plan.
Development Objectives
1. Create and enhance neighborhoods that provide parks and open spaces, public access to
natural amenities located on and adjacent to the site, and pedestrian linkages
throughout and among adj acent neighborhoods.
2. Incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum feasible extent.
3. Provide pedestrian access to commercial and industrial centers, public lands, and
schools.
4. Avoid designs that isolate neighborhoods. Provide traffic or pedestrian circulation
within and between developments.
5 . Avoid or mitigate encroachment by incompatible land uses which can have a negative
impact on the residential living environment. Mitigation measures include, but are not
limited to, the use of open space, berms, dense landscaping vegetation, and similar
buffers.
6. Allow higher density multiple dwelling housing in areas within close proximity of
existing support services and facilities, and where there is adequate access to collector
and arterial streets.
7. Ensure new development includes design features such as buffering, screening, and
spatial separation from collector and arterial streets; and from anticipated adverse
environmental impacts including, but not limited to, noise and air pollution.
8. Link neighborhoods to each other, and to parks, schools and commercial centers via
local streets or pedestrian trails.
9. Ensure subdivisions are designed to avoid direct private drive access from and to
major collector and-arteriaLstr-eets.-
10. Promote innovative subdivision design and housing products through the use of the
planned unit development process and similar techniques.
11. Avoid locating high density housing to primarily serve as a buffer or as a land use
suited for absorbing negative impacts of adjacent land uses. High density housing
should only be developed in those areas near support and commercial services.
12. Support development designs that are tailored to environmentally sensitive areas
containing rugged topography, wetlands, and woodlands.
13. Code enforcement shall be used to keep illegal uses and physical deterioration from
compromising the value and integrity of the housing stock within the community.
14. Parking lots shall be screened to reduce the impact upon adjacent uses.
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 42
(
t
\.
RESIDENTIAL - RURAL DENSITY (R-RD)
(
Purpose
This is a special classification for all hind where urban services are unavailable. Land is
often designated R-RD in order to preserve large tracts of land which can eventually accommodate
orderly planned urban development.
This is a special category because, over time, agriculture and related uses may not be the
highest and best for all land in this classification. Thus, the official Land Use Guide Plan may
parenthetically indicate other classifications for certain R-RD land. The alternate categories reflect
the city's determination that the property would be eventually conducive to some urban, rather than
rural use.
R-RD is primarily determined by availability of public services rather than by proximity to
natural features or to facilities such as streets or certain other land uses, unlike the other Residential
designations. Agriculture is the primary allowable use, pending the approval and construction of
urban services.
This is a means of guiding the ultimate urban development of the community whereby the
R-RD classification may reserve land for another classification, when urban services are physically
available.
Conversion of agricultural land for recreational open space uses in the rural service area is
appropriate, provided the uses can function in a manner that is compatible with both agricultural
uses and the lack of urban services. Such uses however should be planned and designed to
facilitate eventual transition to urban services.
(
Development Location Criteria
All land where public sanitary sewer is unavailable is classified R-RD. While some land
areas outside the MUSA are shown in other land use categories, these are intended to reflect a
build-out condition and the R-RD Designation will be changed to reflect these ultimate uses when
utilities- beeome available. -
Density
Maximum rural density is one dwelling unit per 40 acres.
Minimum Requirements for Development
Forty acres and frontage on a public street.
Utilities
No public utilities available.
\.
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 44
, ,\-;:
'.
URBAN HIGH DENSITY ~-HD)
(.
Purpose
This classification is characterized by dwellings other than single family detached houses at
the higher residential densities. The dominant construction fonn is attached homes and apartments;
single family detached houses may be allowed in a Planned Dnit Development. This classification
is intended to provide an opportunity to create population centers and to accommodate the demand
for affordable housing located near community activity areas.
Development Location Criteria
· Development of attached homes and multiple family dwellings is appropriate near
major parks and other open space, along collector streets and near Town Center and
other commercial centers.
· The wide range of possible housing styles, and development design flexibility make it
feasible to fonn a suitable transition to and from adjacent existing or proposed uses, and
to relate new development to most terrain and other natural features.
· Final density and development design will be a function of adopted zoning and
subdivision standards and procedures.
Density
Densities up to 30 units per acre may be allowed, where developments with higher density (
and those with a mix of housing styles will primarily be realized in Planned Dnit Developments.
Density should be expressed through one or more zoning classifications which, among other
standards, reflect various minimum lot dimension and area requirements.
Minimum Requirements for Development
A site area of at least 1,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit for apartments should be retained;
provided, a density reduction will be often necessary in environmentally sensitive and Shoreland
. Management Areas.
. Theminimwn ar-ea fer Planned-Bnit- Bevelopments--should-be-tfr acres-in o-rderto provide
for the open space and location of multiple family dwellings required for higher density
developments.
Public street frontage is required for all development, unless alternate access is expressly
approved by the City for a Planned Unit Development or similar arrangement.
. Utilities
All city utilities required; utilities must be at least under contract for construction in order to
classify land R-HD.
\,
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 48
.
c'-
. ,: ,'-:-
Typical Uses
Two-family dwellings, townhouses, apartments, and other designs, including single family
manufactured dwellings and single family dwellings by conditional use permit and/or Planned Unit
Development; boarding houses; schools; churches;-iecreational open space, parks, and play grounds
with public utilities; and public buildings.
Corresponding Zoning
R-4 (High Density Residential), including provision for Planned Unit Developments needed
to implement the range of allowable densities and to express the intent of the Comprehensive Plan
for this classification.
(
-- ...-..--....--. .--.,.-.--.- .---...---...-..-------..-- ..,- -.-.....-...- --' --- .-... -...- - - _..-.-- .._-- -. -. - .-.- --..---.... ..-.--.-..------....-- ---- ----- --.--...----...- ,-.._- - -
i
\..
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 49
COMMERCIAL-BUSINESS AND OFFICE PARK (C-BO)
('
\
Purpose
This classification is characterized by high-amenity planned developments which have a
low traffic generation rate and a site utilization that is compatible with natural features. Primary
uses are corporate headquarters; and professional and administrative offices; and limited research,
development and manufacturing facilities. Related secondary uses such as restaurants where food
is ordered and consumed on the premises, hotels, and other businesses having limited contact with
the general public and no retail sale of products could be allowed as conditional uses.
Office parks, often formed as Planned Unit Developments, can serve small professional
services in a group setting whereas such uses might otherwise be located in retail centers or in
scattered freestanding buildings. The high design standards should ensure compatibility with high
density housing and the potential for shared parking, open space, convenient housing and service,
and reduction of traffic generation onto public streets.
Retailing should be allowed only as an accessory use when it is clearly incidental to the
primary use.
Development Location Criteria
High level of transition to all proximate residential land and development; near arterial
access points, i.e., intersections of arterial and/or major collector streets; high amenity features are (
very conducive to "gateway" recognition; adjoining or very near existing or planned industrial or
multi-residential areas; may develop in conjunction with major commercial centers.
Maximum Building Coverage
35% with all yard and parking minimum standards met or exceeded.
Minimum Requirements for Development
1 acre
.--.---- -------,-,- -.--..-.-.--. ---.-.-- ---- -..-.---.--- .._- -- - -- --..- '-.'- .--..-- ----
Public street frontage is required for all development, unless alternate access is expressly
approved by the City for a Planned Unit Development or similar arrangement.
Utilities
All city utilities required; utilities must be under contract for construction for land to be
classified C-BO.
Typical Uses
High amenity facilities for corporate headquarters, professional, administrative, executive,
medical, research (exclusive of heavy manufacturing and distribution), and governmental offices
without merchandising; very limited retailing incidental to the primary use, e.g., news stands,
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 58
HOUSING ANALYSIS. ISSUES AND NEEDS
(
In general, the City's housing supply is adequate. The new luxury and move-up housing
adds an important element to the City's supply and gives it diversity, not typically experienced in
the past except for the houses and properties on the lake. The lake itself probably adds 10 to 20
percent of the market value to the houses which abut the lake and for those with access rights
through a nearby marina. The percentage of lower cost or affordable housing is likely to drop
because: 1) many of these units are being remodeled, expanded or demolished and 2) the volume
and cost of new construction. Within the next 10 to 15 years, virtually all the cottages or
summer homes are likely to be eliminated. However, the actual number of affordable units could
increase if low cost housing is included in some new subdivisions.
A reasonable supply of single family, duplex, and townhouse rentals exist in the
community. These categories total approximately 258 rental units, which amounts to 6 percent
of the total single family, duplex, and townhouse housing stock.
One apparent gap in the housing supply appears to be the inadequate supply of newer
apartment units. A freestanding growth community or a mature suburban community could be
expected to have from 25 to 30 percent of its housing stock in apartments or multiple family
developments. Only 12.85 percent of Prior Lake's housing supply is classified as multiple family
or apartment. This percent is likely to continue to decrease based on the market demand for
single family housing. The vacancy rate could be an indicator that there is an adequate amount (
of multiple family and rental units in the community. However, Prior Lake does not have any
new or modem apartment developments which incorporate amenities such as underground
parking, swimming pool, community room, etc. This need and consideration of families who
would occupy such units has been neglected primarily because the City's focus has been on
family units abutting the lake and the absence of high employment centers has not created the
demand. In addition, lack of direct freeway access also affects this housing type. The new river
crossing and State Highway 169 bypass along with the attraction of more industry to Prior Lake
and increases in empty-nesters will justify construction of this type of housing.
Housing conditions are excellent and benefit substantially by the amenity and
---oppomiffitles provloea-l5y Pnor Lake and Spnng I;--aIre:-The lakes contribute to some minor ---
problems since recreational opportunities place additional burden on garages and houses relative
to storing and maintaining recreational equipment. Too often the yards serve as areas for storage
beyond a reasonable amount. Listed below are some of the assets and problems related to the
lakes and the recreational opportunities:
Assets
1. The lake's shape with its many bays provides a substantial shoreline which allows
many properties to have access to the lake.
2. Lake marinas tend to spread the beneficial value of the lake impact beyond the lake.
3. Steep topography and wooded areas add interest and provide scenic views. (
Comprehensive Plan 2020
. Chapter 3
Page 101
".
,'-:'
( .
. 4. The lake prevents through traffic from using the residential streets.
Problems
1. Fifteen percent of the yards were categorized as inadequate because of outside storage
of boats, trailers, inoperable vehicles or other conditions.
2. Lake cabins and seasonal houses create some minor problems because they affect the
visual conditions - but most are likely to be removed because ofland values.
3. Some site development problems are related to setbacks, hills, slopes and the lakes.
For example, less than minimum front yard setbacks exist in some locations and
garages are sometimes located directly adjacent to the road. (Special setbacks may be
required when a road abuts a lake and when the lot is affected by a shoreland setback
of 75 feet.)
4. Certain locations have an obsolete platting layout with dirt roads and a poor lot
configuration.
5. In some cases a lot is split by a street.
6. Because some residential areas are faced with inappropriate on-street parking of
trailers, some streets are signed prohibiting such parking, but the signs are often
ignored.
Other observations not necessarily attributed to the lake include the following:
1. Parking of trucks, cars and other vehicles in front yards (grassy area) is quite
common.
2. Inadequate yard conditions often times appears in pairs or more, suggesting that the
manner in which one owner uses property affects how others use property.
3. The size of the lot and the intensity of the yard deficiencies impact the impression of
the neighborhood. For example, more deficiencies on smaller lots tends to establish a
more blighting condition than would be the case with the same number of deficiencies
on larger lots. If the house and garage are small, it can cause the owner to use the
yard for activities and functions that might otherwise be conducted inside.
4. There is a correlation between dirt roads and house and yard conditions.
5. A substantial amount of infrastructure improvement and new housing is underway in
---the_Shakepee-Mdewankanten-Sieu-x-cemmunity.--In--seme-locations-condit-ions-are----- - - - ----
spotty because of older and obsolete dwellings, the number of dumpsters in the area
and yard conditions. Housing is quite mixed in terms of type and size, ranging from
mobile homes to large new houses. Some units have attached garages as well as
detached garages.
(
From a demographic stand point Prior Lake is becoming more diversified in terms of
family size, age, and income. Housing costs are accelerating primarily because new subdivisions
are offering substantial amenity, relatively large lots and construction of more housing for the
move-up market. However, a significant amount of affordable and moderate cost housing
remains available.
\
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 102
(:.
c. Residential Development - Ensure that public services and on-site
improvements are completed at the time of residential development.
d. Industrial I Commercial Encroachment - Protect residential areas from
industrial and commercial encroachment to.the maximum practicable extent;
recognizing that the degree of encroachment may vary with isolated single
family developments, which are part of an urban neighborhood.
e. Developer's Burden - The burden of a satisfactory transition from one
density or dwelling type to another rests with the developer seeking
development plan approval.
f. Viable Neighborhoods - Discourage new residential subdivisions in isolated
areas that have little or no potential to either develop into a viable neighborhood or to
assimilate with an established neighborhood.
g. Multiple family Development - Consideration of development plans for
multiple family dwellings in areas so designated on the Land Use Guide Plan,
should include the following design-related items:
1) New developments should not isolate existing single family dwellings
by inhibiting pedestrian and/or vehicular access.
2) New development completely surrounded by single family dwellings,
should be discouraged in favor of large scale planned unit developments which
are more conducive to a mix of housing styles with shared amenities.
3) There should be convenient access to collector and arterial streets
and to available transit so to not unduly contribute to congestion on local
residential streets.
4) Large common open areas may provide an effective transitional use
to other uses.
h. Code Enforcement Program - Develop and consider for adoption a code
enforcement program for existing housing.
(
OBJECTIVE 3 - Open Space Preservation: Provide suitable passive open space for
the preservation ofthe natural environment and the enjoyment of residents.
POLICIES:
a. Ponding and Wetlands - Retain natural ponding areas and, as applicable
per state law, wetlands.
b. Large Planned Unit Developments - Promote platting oflarge planned unit
developments.
(
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 106
.
.
Policies
a. Density: Maintain a variety of residential densities (units per acre)
("
ACTION STEPS
As noted previously, the Comprehensive Plan has increased the range of permitted
densities in the City from the previous high of 18 units per acre to 30 units per acre. The zoning
ordinance expected to be adopted by March, 1997 will reflect this increase in maximum
densities.
b. Community structure concept: Utilize a community structure concept that is focused upon
neighborhoods as the framework for developing and redeveloping residential areas.
ACTION STEPS
The Comprehensive Plan contains a section of specific objectives for each neighborhood
in the City. These objectives cover virtually every aspect of community development, including
land use, transportation, parks and open space, aesthetics, housing and capital improvements.
These objectives will be addressed in the zoning ordinance amendments to the extent possible.
Other items which are not zoning-related will serve as input to the City Capital Improvement
Program. It is not possible.to attach a time frame to this policy as most items will be
accomplished incrementally on a year to year basis.
(
c. Residential Development: Insure that public servIces and on-site improvements are
completed at the time of residential development.
ACTION STEPS
The subdivision ordinance requires that public utilities and on-site improvements be
installed before building permits or certificates of occupancy are issued. This process will be
refined during the review of the subdivision ordinance which will be completed by March, 1997.
d. Industrial/Commercial: Protect residential areas from industrial and commercial
encroachment to the maximum practicable extent, recognizing that the degree of
encroachment may vary with isolated single family developments which are part of an urban .
neighborhood.
ACTION STEPS
The Comprehensive Plan proposes new commercial and industrial development in areas
which are either remote from existing residential areas or where natural buffers such as wetlands
are available. The new zoning ordinance will strengthen the requirements for screening and
buffering between residential and non-residential land uses.
(
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 113
Protection of Watercourses
(
,
The surface water management chapter details the policies and recommended actions to
be taken to protect the streams and lakes within the City. In addition, the City enforces a
Floodplain Management ordinance and has: recently adopted significant amendments to the
Shoreland Management ordinance consistent with the revised rules promulgated by the
Department of Natural Resources.
Unique and Endangered Species
Objective 5 provides for the conservation and protection of the natural environment and
related policies include developing regulations which will protect the environment and requiring
developers to retain as much of the natural environment as possible. Presently, the City is not
aware of the presence of any endangered species within the City.
Prevention of Premature Development
The City presently has a significant portion of its' land area located outside of the
Municipal Urban Service Area. Approximately 380 acres of this land is enrolled in the
Agricultural Preserve Program. Additional acreage within the MUSA is enrolled in the Green
Acres program. Policies in the plan include discouraging or prohibiting urban development
beyond existing utility service areas. Extension of the MUSA is governed by the Metropolitan
Council and presumably any requested extensions will be evaluated by the policies outlined in (
the Regional Blueprint.
Mineral Extraction
In 1991, the City conducted a study of the potential for mineral extraction in the City. It
was determined that there were no gravel deposits of significant commercial potential within the
City and subsequently, in 1992, the City amended its' zoning ordinance to eliminate mineral
extraction as a conditional use in the Agricultural District. The current Zoning Ordinance allows
excavation as a temporary use with approval of a conditional use p~rmit.
Historic Natural Resource Areas
The natural resource area of greatest historical significance is Prior Lake and Spring
Lake. Currently, the City enforces both Shoreland and Floodplain management ordinances
which regulate development near Prior and Spring Lakes. In addition, the surface water
management chapter of this plan contains a number of policies and recommended actions will act
to minimize adverse impacts on these two major water bodies.
\
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 117
,,' The growth of neighboring communities, the completion and opening of the new bridge
( :. over the Minnesota River at County Road 18 and State Highway 101, the connection of County
Road 21 with 1-35 east of the City, and the development of intense commercial and recreational
uses by the Mdewakanton Dakota Community wip likely press development at a faster pace than
anticipated by the projections made earlier In the planning process. The Metropolitan Council
projections assumed residential development to proceed at a rate of 123 units per year. For the
above reasons, the City has assumed a higher rate of growth.
Constraints to development are both natural and man-made. Physical constraints include
topographical conditions, water bodies, soil conditions, and surface characteristics (wetlands, for
example). These are relatively easy to quantify and usually are thus deducted from the total
calculated amount of land in the MUSA. "Developable land," therefore can be determined as a net
number of acres.
There are some man-made constraints to development which are due to external forces
beyond the City's effective control. Examples include the general economy and interest rates,
especially as they apply to construction; state laws and programs that may mandate certain limits on
development tools (tax increment financing, for example) and on the City's ability to generate
revenues for services through taxes; and regional policies regarding housing and the expansion of
the MUSA.
(
Other constraints include local policies that are defined by the City's vision for the future,
including the desire for a rate of development that may be lower than private interests would prefer.
Certain land uses may be preferred over others and this will be reflected in the City Plans and
regulations.
The development of the Mystic Lake complex can be viewed as an asset which provides
employment opportunities, recreation and hospitality facilities available to the community, and a
destination widely identified with the City). It can also be perceived as a constraint upon City
development as it represents competitive facilities that reduce opportunities for similar uses on
taxable real estate, traffic impact upon neighborhoods that would otherwise be controlled if the
destination uses and operations were under public jurisdiction, and regional agency agreements
with the Mdewakanton Dakota Community that provide sanitary sewer via lines through the Rural
Service Area despite regional policies that strive to retain the Rural Service Area notwithstanding
the desire oflandowners to also use the facilities.
The City's primary asset is its people and its continuing desire to plan for the future,
including redevelopment and preservation of areas that established the physical and social, and
political character of the community. This plan accounts for the various assets and constraints
through the various elements.
(
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 3
Page 124
(:.
(
(
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING AND FUTURE TRANSPORTATION
PROBLEMS
EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM
As with all municipalities, jurisdiction over the roadway system is shared among three
levels of government; the state, the county and the City. The Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MN/DOT), through its Metro District, maintains the trunk highway system on
behalf of the state and Scott County maintains the County State-Aid Highway (CSAH) and
County Road systems. The remaining streets and roadways are the responsibility of the City.
. Traffic volumes at selected locations on the Prior Lake street system are shown in Figure
4-3. These values are obtained from traffic counts made by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MN/DOT), Scott County and the City of Prior Lake. Multi-lane roadways are
shown in Figure 4-4.
PROGRAMMEDIMPROVEMffiNTS
Capacity improvements to state and county roads in the City of Prior Lake or the vicinity
are already programmed including the following:
· TH 13-- That portion of TH 13 that extends from CSAH 44 to CSAH 42 in the City of
Prior Lake will be upgraded to improve capacity, operation and safety. The proposed
design is a "two-lane divided" with left and right turn lanes at access points. The City of
Prior Lake has signed an agreement with MN/DOT on appropriate intersection
geometrics. Funding has been approved for improvements at CSAH 12 (Spring Lake
Rd.) and for traffic signal coordination/interconnection from Fish Point Road to CSAH
44.
· CSAH 42--This roadway is currently four-lane from Femdale Avenue to TH 13. An
upgrade to four-lane divided from CSAH 17 in Shakopee to Femdale Avenue is
programmed for 1999, which will establish a continuous four-lane divided facility from
CSAH 17 to the City of Apple Valley.
Improvements to roadways outside of the City of Prior Lake over the next few years will
also have major impacts on circulation between Prior Lake and adjacent municipalities:
· CSAH 21--A new roadway is programmed for construcition in 2001-2002 north of Prior
Lake connecting CSAH 18 and CSAH 16. It will ultimately connect to existing CSAH
21 at CSAH 42.
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 4
Page 134
(:-
TRANSIT PLAN
INTRODUCTION
In keeping with the limited availability of transit service, the number of Prior Lake
residents using transit is modest, although stable. Continued population growth in Prior Lake,
severe congestion in the I-35W corridor and transit services improvements will likely increase
transit ridership. Human service needs include .transportation, which are met by a variety of
transit options.
The City supports the continued development of appropriate transit services in the area in
coordination with the Metropolitan Council Transportation Division, the Minnesota Valley
Transit Authority and other transit providers. The City will work with these and other
organizations and individuals to identify the demand for public transit and to design new services
and facilities. Well-utilized transit services can contribute to congestion relief on major
roadways in the community while providing important mobility for certain residents.
(
TRANSIT NEEDS
The 1996 Metropolitan Council's Transportation Development Guide Chapter/Policy
flaIl (1996) identifies Prior Lake as generally lying in the "outer suburban" transit zone. The
following services are most appropriate in that area:
. Peak period express bus service
. Ridesharing
. Local circulation provided with small vehicles or dial-a-ride type vehicles
EXISTING TRANSIT SYSTEM
Re~ular Route Transit Service
Located within the Metropolitan Council metropolitan transit taxing district, City
residents are taxed for regional transit service through the property tax levy. Effective in 1990,
the City of Prior Lake "opted-out" of the regular metropolitan transit system and, along with
other nearby communities, established locally designed transit services. The intent was to
increase the level of service and to develop new services that were tailored to local needs.
The opt-out cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Rosemount, Prior Lake and
Savage joined together to create the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA). The MVT A
Board of Commissioners includes representatives from each of the cities along with
representatives from Dakota and Scott Counties. An Executive Director administers contracts
for services with bus operators, develops funding agreements With the Metropolitan Council,
conducts marketing programs, monitors existing transit services and develops new transit
services.
(
'\.,
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 4
Page 1 S4
funding requirements, increase park dedication fees, dedicated park tax, bond referendum,
gambling tax, etc. The 1997 Parks and Library Referendum was successful and included funds
for the new LibrarylResource Center, irrigation and lights at the Ponds, new playground
equipment, Lakefront Park development, and Community Park! Athletic Complex development.
This referendum will take care of some our community needs for many years to come. However,
this is a one time development resource, we need to be aware of continued growth, equipment
replacements, improvements, and ongoing maintenance of our parks and trails.
. "
Needs for Indoor Recreation Space
,(
In planning the future of the community consideration should be given to the need for
indoor recreation space. The new LibrarylResource Center will accommodate our dance
program and be available for community events and meetings. The Dakota community currently
has a facility which is open to the public for swimming and athletic activities on a fee basis. It
may be possible to include space in a future school that would be available for recreational
programming. Community school facilities have been very successful in other communities and
communications with school district personnel would include the possibilities of a community
school facility.
Future Needs Assessment and Community
As Prior Lake continues to develop it is critical to the success of the parks and recreation
system that there is an ongoing analysis of the parks and recreation needs of the community. It is
imperative that a community survey be conducted so that future park and trail development is
driven by the needs of the community and so that recreation programs are based on the
community needs. Ongoing communications needs to exist between city staff and the
community. This communication can be accomplished through surveys, program evaluations,
public meetings, and open invitations to the public to attend Parks Advisory Committee
meetings. As the community develops there will undoubtedly be an increase in school age
children that will participate in sports and recreation programs. With this increase there will be
demands for additional parks and athletic fields. As mentioned there is a conceptual plan that
could meet the existing needs of the community but without further studies and surveys it would
be difficult at best to try to determine the future needs of the community. Future parks, trails, and
recreation programs should have a direct correlation to the demographics and socio-economic
status of the community.
(
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 5
Page 200
1;\ ,';
r.o
\, ..
PLANNING AND LAND USE
General
Wastewater collection and treatment" needs are dictated by the land use, population
density, and the planning period for the study area. Each new connection to the system adds to
the wastewater flow in the sanitary sewer system. Land use and population densities have been
developed and discussed in the City's overall comprehensive plan. This information will be
utilized in conjunction with the planning periods defined here to analyze the City's wastewater
system.
Planning Period
The planning period for municipal engineering projects generally coincides with the
useful life of the particular utility system. Under normal use conditions, mechanical equipment
such as lift station pumps is expected to last about 20 years with good maintenance.
Underground structural components like collection system pipes are typically designed for 50
years of service.
(
For this update, the MCES has requested that the year 2020 be used for the planning
period. In order to consider the ''worst case", the analysis will include a projection of the
ultimate development of the City of Prior. Lake including all of the current City limits and the-
"orderly annexation area" that may develop at some time.
Land Use
The City of Prior Lake Land Use Plan is presented and discussed in Chapter 3 of the
Comprehensive Plan. Basic data from the City's Land Use Plan will be used for projecting the
future wastewater needs of the City.
The current MUSA is entirely within the City limits but it does not include all of the land
within the City limits. "Development of land within the MUSA requires the extension of
municipal sanitary sewer services. Land outside the MUSA cannot be connected to the
municipal sewer system and must be developed with larger individual lots to accommodate
onsite wastewater treatment. As the land inside the current MUSA is developed, there will be
interest in expanding the MUSA to include additional land within the current City limits and
possibly, the orderly annexation area.
Since it is difficult to anticipate exactly which parcels of land will develop first, the City
is utilizing an "undesignated MUSA" for the defined area within the City limits and the orderly
annexation area. The documentation required by the MCES for the undesignated MUSA is
included in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan.
(
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 7
Page 254
.
.~
population increase has stabilized since 1990. Population projections for this report were based on
the Prior Lake 2010 Comprehensive Plan and discussions with City planners. On this basis and
also based on the traffic analysis planning results, the ultimate population of Prior Lake has been
calculated to be 28,950. The past populations.~om.1980 to 1995 appear on Table 3-9 in Chapter 3.
Also shown in the table are the population projections for the years 2005, 2010, and 2020. The past
population and population projections are shown graphically as Figure 3-6 in Chapter 3.
(
Table 3-9 in Chapter 3 also presents numbers of households and the persons per household
ratios. This data indicates that, while the total population and number of households are increasing
in Prior Lake, the number of persons per household is decreasing. This is a trend that is occurring
throughout the Twin Cities at this time.
The City of Prior Lake Land Use Plan is presented and discussed in the "Land Use" section
of the comprehensive plan. Basic data from the City's Land Use Plan will be used for projecting
the future wastewater needs of the City.
The current MUSA is entirely within the City limits but it does not include all of the land
within the City limits. Development of land within the MUSA requires the extension of municipal
sanitary sewer services. Land outside the MUSA cannot be connected to the municipal sewer
system and must be developed with larger individual lots to accommodate onsite wastewater
treatment. As the land inside the current MUSA is developed, there will be interest in expanding
the MUSA to include additional land within the current City limits and possibly, the orderly
annexation area. (
Since it is difficult to anticipate exactly which parcels of land will develop first, the City is
utilizing an "undesignated MUSA" for the defined area within the City limits and the orderly
annexation area. The documentation required by the MCES for the undesignated MUSA is
included in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan.
PAST WATER USAGE RECORDS
One of the most important aspects of any comprehensive water study is having a clear
understanding of how a city's consumers use water. With this information and accurate records of
past usage, projections can be made of future water demand. A course of action can then be
developed to meet this demand.
The City of Prior Lake maintains records of the annual volume of raw water pumped from
its wells, as well as the volume of water sold to its customers. These records permit evaluation of
all the components of water demand--the water used by residential, commercial/industrial, and
institutional users.
The demand imposed on a water system can be defined as the total water consumed by
users of the system in a specified period of time. Typically, daily and hourly time periods are
evaluated. Daily demands are usually evaluated on the basis of average day and maximum day (
requirements.
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 8
Page 271
f..
AUEM.llX..A
MISSION
The following Mission Statement was adopted by the City Council on February 3, 1997:
"The City of Prior Lake is committed to serving the common good of its residents by
promoting community values, environmentally sensitive community development,
robust business growth, financial stability, safety, and diverse recreational
opportunities. "
VISION
The Vision of ,the community at full development was also adopted February 6, 1995, as
part of the Strategic Plan. The ultimate community should be comprised of development which is
balanced among residential, commercial, and other land uses.
(
PRIOR LAKE STRATEGIC PLAN
THE VISION
Adopted February 6,1995
Revised February 3,1997
Revised April, 1998
Revised March, 1999
"At buildout the City of Prior Lake will be balanced between residential,
commercial and business. Strong neighborhoods and homeowner associations will
characterize most developments, neighborhoods will be connected by transportation
amenities for pedestrians and/or motor vehicles. Platting will be encouraged
through Planned Unit Developments which preserve natural features. While single
family dwellings will be the predominant housing type, townhomes (for empty
nesters) and multifamily developments on "!ajor arterials are expected.
Annexation will be evaluated and a determination made regarding land areas to
incorporate within the City.
"Neighborhood commercial centers will predominate, although a few community
commercial centers will exist. Commercial development will be localized primarily
to major arterial intersections involving State Highway 13, County Road 42, County
Road 44, County Road 21, County Road 12, County Road 82 and 83. One regional
center is expected at the intersection of County Roads 42 and 83.
(
With respect to business, the focus will be on developing a mixture including office,
light industrial, high-tech and light manufacturing. Office, warehouse and
industrial developments are expected along CR 21. One or more corporate office
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Appendix A
Page A-I
~
~
L-
a
--
L-
a..
o
>.
......
G
m Q) C
:> ~ o..~
. en -'
C'U
Q) C
~~
a.
E
8
6 ~~ III ,
~ ~ =.sf: "c ~ 6
::> Iii ~"6>j "~ '8 6 B
- 0 Ollio_ m~ q:: Jll
..., laW L.o_ en
c: ~~ lJ 6_ ~~ illCil c
~ 06 ~ 1':! i O~"g> ~ B lJ ~ oi 8-
8~~~ ~ &e:lii~15 "0 lJO/I >.
~ i~U ~ ~~!f~ h p~
.2> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -m ~ jq OBI 15 f6 J! ~ ~ ~
~ 10::::>::> ~ O::O::I-"'1:m :;Ii!: I!~~~cn
J DOl 8 ~Olll J 11101111
'"
z.~
'-
Q)
t:
t:
mCO
ma.
m _
T- '-
cxf ~
~~
~.~
~~
z
-<
~
~
~
00.
~
~
z
~<
~~
~~
~-<
~~
~~
~o
;
~
~
o
~
~
~
u
[
..,. ~"
.? l~.z-<
. - . .~
~~1l f&~
S ., - ~ CL..
~"5S ,!jS:;
~ ~ R ~ ~ J ~ ;'2t 1
-3 J!"E.l< '" _ _ .. .. . ~i: !i
$ Zi.l 5 .. I ii i ~ = ~; 't
o o'l!le ~ c c..a:~ ;:a-;; VI
CD z -8 c E ~ .... c c "'~ e ol
5 ~~d8 .OJ ~! ~ ~ ~ ~~l.,
o .-. .L._r... . ~I;: ~. .
! 1-: j :J !, i: 'l'~ ,
o ......; = o..J , ,: ,I J: ....
- ..:-n 0
!
o ;
o 1.
n \
ficL:>
\ 0
-__..._l.ll
r b
o
Q
p
n==-_.
iO
'0
'0
o "
o \
o \,
l!. = 6=
~
oS
~
~
o
o
o
l~ 0
:t 0
I
i
i
i
)
..,
:<=> <=> '1 =0' ... ....--..
. I 0
1. 0 1:"".
.:0....
"c::::lp
[::,
Ai-t.
"<>;1"
"
Comprehensive Plan 2020
Chapter 4
Page 129
~
~
L-
o
--
L-
a..
o
~
o
'OQ)
mm
<eJ2c
~ .Q
.~~~
0..2<(
'"
z.~
m
c
c
co
~o..
O>L.:
T"""CO
O>-~
~F
~.~
~~
\, ,
.J
i!i
~ ~ I
Q: r= ~
W 0 ~!!.
ll;j5 3'"
~ ~~ ll;E
<( ~i5a~~
~ r~e'i=~
~ -1 s>-"......j_
- 82;'0""
';l ..... >-.
IS 0:::: ~ j! !i i5 ~
- 0 lQ:ii"j!Z
~ . :~ Q:~
~ - ~O C~
0::: ~~ ~~ _
Q Ii! iii
~ ::)
2
:i
I
8 II .t"
18 . ,
,*bI ~JIIJJJ
~j · · g I.,! If
I " ~ ~II
· i!~;tlil
.".33
Q.
o
~
lO
a:
o
a:
~
<:)
C\I
'\
~ ~
W CO
I- w
~ ~
(fJ ffi
a: 0
~(fJ~
......I-Q
~Z~
W~
O~_
WLUco
(fJ>~
00-,
On.. a: ~
Q.~
a:~~
Q.-~
Cl
Z
W
C)
W
-J
)
----..;.----------.
~
~
~
!.-_--
J
'1
f
'~ij
..Jq
0..' ,
a:
~
~
C? w
CO ~
t: C/)
!B z
:r: w
X :c
w w
a:
0..
~
o
o
.
f
iii
o
z
w
C-'
W
-l
HH:!d1hIU
i i ii · ii i i~ ~~~;
~
<e
~--
I
zro
Ioo-l
<ew
~O:::
A::=:)
~0
f-!-
<eLL
~
"
l:ildOXVHS
:il~VAVS
_'~
..
..~
I
...,
~
~
:il:ildOXVHS
1- r;.l r;.l
-... r;.l ~
Ilc I
.. 0 -<
~ ~
~
en
r;.l
r;.l
Ilc
o
~
=
en
I
..
WSB
EXISTING MUSA BOUNDARY
~ FUTURE MUSA SEARCH AREAS
CITY LIMITS
SEWER COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
U- I
o 2000 4000
ct~. me.
EXISTING MUSA BOUNDARY
FIGURE
7-1
--.
3dOJIVHS
I I;L
"-Ii (I
I' I.
1',II!!!!!!ww! II
..^ 111111/ 111111 m HI
<III
3~VAVS
-
~
Il..
0
:::c::
-<
::E::
C'I.l
~
:3::3:dO)lVHS
CC1b~ .l V.l .l
gallery .
news .
A Farmer Fights To Save Agricultural Land
forum .
Few people have had as great an influence in
protecting Dakota County agricultural land as
Jerry Stelzel over the past 25 years. Stelzel
helped craft the Agricultural Preserves Act of
1980 while serving on a Metro Council
committee. The law helps farmers, through tax
breaks and other incentives, to maintain their
properties as farms rather than sell to developers.
perspectives .
resources .
Stelzel supports smart growth initiatives
because they help preserve rural areas. The
83-year-old former farmer says his main goal is to retain the rural
atmosphere of the county's 13 townships. He lives in Empire
Township, not far from Rosemount and Apple Valley, where two
thirds of the land remains agricultural.
Dakota County's mixture of towns, cities and farms has a great
appeal, resulting in tremendous population gains. Ironically, the high
quality of life that drew people to Dakota County may be threatened
by the demands of a larger population.
Stelzel's work in Dakota County resulted in his selection as
Minnesota Leader of the Year Award in 1987, Dakota County Man of
the Year in 1981 and commendations from seven other organizations
ranging from the International Lions Club to the Dakota County
Planning Commission.
With a laugh, he likens his civic involvement to a "disease" which
captured him years ago. He sees his political career as less about
him, and more about Empire Township.
"It's about what you can do for the township, not what the township
can do for you," says Stelzel, putting a twist on a famous line. And
he's been doing it for the township now for more than three decades.
brol,lgl1t to you by I ~ Metropolitan
Metropolitan Council . .-:2A Councl1
http://www.metrocouncil.org/mnsmartgrowth/citizens__stelzel.htm
1/15/01
---- -~ A~A_A ._U~ ...."'''''''JvJOlUIg III :staLl;;, :SLuay IlnGS
rage 1 or L
news freetime travel homezone cars. Com workavenue shopping communitie$
Metro I Region Nation I World Politics Business Sports Variety Opinion Fun & Games Talk
METRO/REGION
Tools
~ E-mail this story
~ Print this page
P Find related
items
..
EntertheYouClick ........ '. . . . ...........
.'. ." . .... You Scor'econtestt
Loss of rural land accelerating in state, study
finds
David Peterson
Star Tribune
Thursday, January 11, 2001
Days after the U.S. Census Bureau reported on just how hot Minnesota's growth
was during the 1990s, another federal agency has arrived to point out some of the
cost of that growth.
The rate at which development gobbled up rural land doubled during the mid-'90s,
according to newly released findings from the nation's National Resources
Inventory, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's twice-a-decade effort to track
what's happening with farmland.
The amount of developed area in Minnesota rose 12 percent in the most recent
stretch, 1992 to 1997, compared with about 6 percent in the two previous five-year
periods.
"What whacks me across the head like a two-by-four," said Scott Elkins, state
director of the Sierra GIub, "is the fact that after people have been living in this
state for 150 years, what sort of weirdness is going on that just in one five-year
period we saw a 12 percent increase in the amount of urbanized land? That's a
remarkable increase over five years."
Other fmdings:
· The rate at which rural land is being lost is slower than the department reported a
year ago, when it fust released data on 1992-97. The estimate then was closer to a
tripling of the rate of development. A computer glitch was later found to have
thrown off all the data, which had,been trumpeted by anti-sprawl groups.
· All of the development that has occurred in Minnesota since the inventory began,
in 1982, has only managed to trim a sliver off of Minnesota's vast land resources:
land classed as "rural" declined from 45.8 million acres to 45.4 million, or 1.1
percent.
It's not clear what is leading to accelerating rates of development, whether it's sheer
population growth, more affluence or other factors. Data from the 2000 census that
will emerge soon will help to clarify the matter. .
Elkins argues that although there's still lots of rural land, it's troubling that the rate
at which land is being developed is climbing.
It's not clear, however, whether it's a blip or a long-term trend. Some experts
maintain that as baby boomers at their peak earning years begin to leave their big
homes and big yards for townhouses, summer cabins and Sun Belt retirement
enclaves, the rate of loss of rural land will decline.
Another question is whether the loss of rural land is accelerating simply because
the state's population is growing so rapidly, and not because land is being used
http://www.startribune.cOmlviewers/qview/cgi/qview.cgi?template=metro_a_cache&slug=lan...l/11 10 1
LOSS or rural lallU acceleranng III Slale, :SLUUY HilGS
ragl:: L U1 L
t Return to top
more wastefully.
The Census Bureau reported late last month that Minnesota's population gai~
during the '90s (544,380) was nearly double its gain during the 1980s (299,129).
That compares with the new findings of a doubling of the rate of urbanization
between 1987-92 and 1992-97.
Elkins agreed that the comparison is intriguing, but said that, from another
perspective, it looks as ifland is being used more wastefully. "The population is
increasing at about 1 percent a year," he said, "but if rural land is being developed
at a rate of 12 percent in five years, then each person is using about 250 percent as
much land as existing residents, if you look at it that way."
The area's hot economy, on the other hand, definitely plays some role, he said.
"People are making money and they want their piece of land. There's nothing
wrong with affluence, but it's interesting that once they get there they want to close
the door behind them."
University of Minnesota geographer Fraser Hart, who has studied the issue oflost
farmland extensively, argued in a speech last summer that compared to what we
have as a nation the loss is "hardly noticeable." He added:
"Most lost farmland was in marginal agricultural counties with soils oflow inherent
fertility and topography unsuited to modem farm machinery. ... Much of this land
probably never should have been cultivated in the first place."
David Peterson can be contacted at david.a.p-eterson@Startribune.com
@ Copyright 2001 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.
http://www.startribune.comlviewers/qview/cgi/qview.cgi?template=metro_a_cache&slug=lan...l/ll 10 1
Subject: Vierling Farm
])ate: Fri, 12 Jan 200117:18:16 EST
From: KMSandvik@aol.com
To: Sfawcett@qwest.net
DATE: January 12, 2001
TO: Kelly & Fawcett, P.A.
FROM: Kathleen and David Sandvik
5410 Hampton St. NE
Prior Lake
952-496-3658
RE: The Vierling Farm
My husband and I may not be able to attend the public hearing on January 16,
2001, We wanted to assist the Vierling Family in their effort to enroll
their property into the Agricultural Preserve Program so that their land may
remain farmland in accordance with their wishes: Please communicate our
support on behalf of the Vierling family.
Thank you for your assistance,
Kathleen Sandvik
lofl
1/13/01 8:47 Al
----------~--------------------
.
January 11,2001
\,
Kelly & Fawcett,P.A.
Attorneys at Law
2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza
444 Cedar Street
Saint Paul, MN 55101
Re: Vierling Farms
To whom it may concern: .
We live directly across the street from the Vierling farm and
defmitely do not want to see them gone.
Our first reason for wanting to see them re-enrolled in the
Agricultural Preserve Program, is that it is their land, has been in
their families for years and they should be the ones to determine
what they do with their land. It is a little scary to think that
someone can take someone else's property from them for any
reason.
The second reason is we enjoy having a farm across the street ~om
us. It gives us the illusion of living in the country.
'" ~~~o~ to attend the hearing.
W~ Linda Smith
5313 140th St NE
Prior Lake, Mn 55372
cc: City of Prior Lake
.
January 11,2001
Kelly & Fawcett, P.A.
Attorneys at Law
2350 Piper J affray Plaza
444 Cedar Street
Saint Paul, MN 55101
Re: Vierling Farms
To whom it may concern:
We live directly across the street from the Vierling farm and
defInitely do not want to see them gone.
Our fust reason for wanting to see them re-enrolled in the
Agricultural Preserve. Program, is that it is their land, has been in
their families for years and they should be the ones to determine
what they do with their land. It is a little scary to think: that
someone can take someone else's property from them for any
reason.
The secon~ reason is we enjoy having a fann across the street from
us. It gives us the illusion of living in the country.
We will not be able to attend the hearing.
l<(~~
Kerry Smith .
5299 140th St NE
Prior Lake, Mn 55372
cc: City of Prior Lake
.
January 11,2001
Planning Commission
City of Prior Lake
Dear Sirs:
I have been a resident of 53 55 140th St. NE since 1969. My home is located in the First
Addition of North Shore Oaks. I am unable to attend the Planning Commission meeting on
January 16.. Since it is implied in the notice that I must be at the meeting to have my voice heard, I
am submitting my written comments to be read at that meeting. If any further comments by me are
desired, I am willing to add to them.
The property directly across from my house has been farmed for as long as I have lived
here, and long before I bought this house. My family has had land in Prior Lake since the 1950's.
The family farm has been an important part of Prior L~e'5. history, .and still is a positive part of
Prior Lake. The recent negative attitude shown by the City of Prior Lake toward farming in this
rural community is a detrimenttothe quality oflife.wehave as residents of Prior Lake.
I support the Vierling family in their desire to continue farming their land The Planning
Commission should amend their Land Use Map to designate their land as Rural Density.
Sincerely,
Karen J. (Koskelin) Lucy
..
.t.
1il
i 1a
~uJj II
:il~t~8~~1 I
~!f'~~fiJi~~~ E
J~~JifI Jill Ij
< ~ ~ ~.~.;f <53 3 ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~
.DD~mmMm....~D~~
.
~
~f6-
C5~
- t:: C)
c..c
--
~O c
Q'
~N
(5
.
.
~c:a
c:a 0
........
"U...,
:;I lU
.s~
G ~
So;
0...,
~ 0
c:a""
t~
...,...,
"UCN
c:a 0
lUffl.
~ao
c:aao
a lot
Gc2
.el
~;
S g
~ g d
G lU 0
";a..;::
.9~8
. S lot
CN..'t;
o ~ c:I
. c:I 0
:a -; 0
G = CNO
....0
c:I~
G c:I
..., 0
..., c:a
.. 0
.!1=
G lU
~ =
:i
~~
~...,
S '"
00
08
~N
9cc:a
w....
~.
:at'
.a"S
G-
~~
f-t lU
.,
..
..
...
C'l
..
..
...
...
..
..
...
ClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClClCI
OIIr-.U)OO.....,C\l.-__CDOO....C?C\l..-o_r-.CDIO.....,C\l.-
C'lC'lC'lC\lC\lC'lC\lC\lC\l.-...........................
SJ,IHll t!lO 'H3&PlWI
CI
CI
CI
C'l
..
..
..
...
011
..
..
...
r-.
..
..
...
CD
..
..
...
10
..
..
...
~
~
~
J
..
...
:J:
~
\:)
~
~
z
'"
...J
~
~
, .
..
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency-
':
~~''''"~~~'''''-~'''''''~'~JI:,_'j>..,'''._..~.,;<.
February I, 2001
r,:.. r-:=;I !r~ IS [1 \\; . ",
, ~\\ ! '-::~ \.::::;J \.S; J '_.! . __'
: I I; -~
! t ))\
I" I 5200'
'\1 FEB-
, I
, \ !
'llL
Mr. Don Rye
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Southeast
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Status of the Water Quality Pollution Issues with the Vierling Farm, Prior Lake, MN
Dear Mr. Rye:
Pursuant to our January 24,2001, telephone conversation regarding the Vierling Farm (Farm)
site, located in the southeast quarter of Section 23, Eagle Creek Township, Scott County, the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has compiled an environmental regulatory status
letter at your request.
The Vierling farm has a long history with the MPCA regarding point and non-point source water
quality runoff issues. The Farm is located along the shore of Pike Lake. The pasture area
adjacent to the farmstead is located on a steep slope across the road from Pike Lake. A metal
culvert beneath the road allows surface water runoff to flow from the hillside pasture directly
into Pike Lake. The Farm uses the hillside area to pasture cows which results in manure and
manure-contaminated surface water runoff to flow either through the culvert into Pike Lake, or,
in the event the culvert is obstructed, over the road and into Pike Lake. The Farm is currently
operating without an MPCA feedlot permit.
A number of corrective actions are available to the Farm to correct the water quality runoff
issues. The corrective action options include such practices vegetative filter strip measures to
moving the operation to a different location. However, the Farm must make a decision regarding
this issue as the MPCA is in the process of designating the Farm as a Concentrated Animal
Feeding Operation under the Clean Water Act.
In 1998, the Minnesota Legislature directed the MPCA to issue National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits to those feedlots with over 1,000 animal units (AU),
otherwise known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAPO). Those feedlots that have
between 300 AU and 1000 AU, and either discharges directly into waters of the state or through
a man-made conveyance are also considered a CAPO; therefore, requiring a NPDES permit.
Under certain circumstances it may also be necessary and appropriate to require a feedlot with
less than 300 AU to be obtain a NPDESpermit. First the feedlot must be designated a CAPO,
which is done on a case-by-case basis following set procedures and criteria outlined in Code of
520 Lafayette Rd, N.; St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (651) 296-6300 (Voice); (651) 292-5332 (TTY)
St. Paul . Brainerd . Detroit Lakes . Duluth · Mankato . Marshall . Rochester . Willmar; www.pca.state.mn.us
Equal Opportunity Employer . Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20% fibers from paper recycled by consumers.
- -----------------..--- ---
"
Mr. Don Rye
Page Two
'...
FederalRegulations, Chapter 40, Section 122.23(c). Since Minnesota has delegation to
administer the NPDES program, the Commissioner of the MPCA has the ability to designate a
feedlot a CAFO if it meets all the criteria. A copy ofthe criteria is enclosed with this
correspondence, The MPCA has conducted a site inspection ofthe Farm as part ofthe CAFO
designation process, The MPCA will meet in March 2001, to determine if the facility should be
designated a CAFO in light of the MPCA inspection results.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at (651) 296-8632.
Sincerely,
d~~:i3~
~;;s E. Sullivan
Project Leader
Compliance and Enforcement Section
Community/Area Wide Program
JS:dmb
cc: Robert Roche, Assistant Attorney General
Steve Jann, Environmental Protection Agency/Region 5
Kate Brigman, MPCA/Mankato
Katherine Logan, MPCA/Rochester
Pat Mader, MPCNSaint Paul
MPCA Feedlot File
. '.
"-:"
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
~~~
- - '--
Designation of Feedlots as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation
In 1998 the Legislature directed the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to
issue National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits to those
feedlots with over 1000 animal units (AU), otherwise known as Concentrated Animal
Feeding Operations (CAFO). Those feedlots that have between 300 AU and 1000 AU,
and either discharges directly into waters of the state or through a man-made conveyance
are also considered a CAFO; therefore requiring a NPDES permit. Under certain
circumstances it may also be necessary and appropriate to require a feedlot with less than
300 AU to be obtain a NPDES permit. First the feedlot must be designated a CAFO,
which is done on a case-by-case basis following set procedures and criteria outlined in
Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 40, Section 122.23(c). Since Minnesota has
delegation to administer the NPDES program, the Commissioner of the MPCA has the
ability to designate a feedlot a CAFO if it meets all the criteria. The MPCA is in the
process of developing CAFO designation procedures, using the designation criteria 40
CFR 122.23(c). The following are the factors that shall be considered.
A. 1. The size of the feedlot operation and the amount of wastes reaching waters of
the state.
2. The location of the feedlot operation relative to waters of the state.
3. The means of conveyance of animal wastes andlor process waste waters into
waters if the state.
4. The slope, vegetation, rainfall, and other factors affecting the likelihood or
frequency of discharge of animal wastes and/or process waste waters into the
waters of the state.
5. Other relevant factors. [e.g., value of the receiving water and its sensitivity to
the pollutant load coming from the feedlot, long term consequences of this
pollutant load on these waters]
B. A feedlot with less than 300 animal units may be designated a CAFO if:
a. pollutants are discharged into waters of the state through any manmade ditch,
flushing system, or other similar manmade device or conveyance; or
5/17/99
b. pollutants are discharged directly into waters of the state which originate
outside of the facility and pass over, across, or through the facility or otherwise
come into direct contact with animals confined in the operation.
C. An on-site inspection shall be conducted prior to the feedlot being designated a
CAFO. CAFO's will be regulated under the NPDES permit program. Once an
inspection is performed, any staff recommendation to designate the feedlot as a
CAFO shall be forwarded to the Commissioner or appropriate delegated staff with
justification for this designation.
When it has been determined that a feedlot may meet the designation criteria outlined
above, staff should refer to the guidance document, "Process for Designating a Feedlot
as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation, "on how to proceed with the designation
process.
5/17/99
;7
..:v ~ ~
- - --
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Process for Designating a Feedlot as a
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation
The following steps outline the process of how a feedlot will be designated a
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) on a case-by-case basis.
1. Identifying Feedlot as Potential CAFO
The first step is for Feedlot staffto identify feedlots under 300 animal units as potential
candidates for CAFO designation.. The process of identifying CAFO candidates will
vary and are too numerous to document. Staff will need to be familiar with the
designation criteria in the event they come across a feedlot that may be a candidate for
designation. The staff familiar with the feedlot will review CAFO designation criteria
and determine it the feedlot meets designation criteria. If the staff believes the feedlot
could be designated a CAPO, the staffwill present the case to feedlot staff at a weekly
Feedlot Permit Forum.
2. Permit Forum
During one of the Feedlot Permit Forums, feedlot staff will present the details of the
feedlot. As a group, the Forum will determine whether the feedlot in question warrants
further investigation, including an inspection and the application of the federal criteria to
the inspection's findings. If the information presented indicates that the process should
continue, a site inspection will be performed. 1) A letter will be sent to the feedlot owner
informing them of the inspection and it's purpose.
3. Inspection of Feedlot
Prior to the inspection a letter will be sent to the owner stating the reason for the
inspection is to determine if the feedlot meets the CAFO designation criteria. A copy of
the designation criteria shall be included, as well as any information that will help explain
the implications of the potential designation and the NPDES permit process in general.
Experienced feedlot staffwill be the pool of inspectors. Minimum of two inspectors will
conduct inspection. The inspection should be documented on the MPCA Feedlot
Inspection Report or other appropriate forms to ensure complete documentation.
4. Permit Forum
After the inspection, the Feedlot Permit Forum will then apply the findings of the
inspection, as well as any other applicable information, to the designation criteria to
determine whether a formal designation of the facility as a CAFO is necessary. If the
Forum agrees that the feedlot should be designated as a CAFO, the process will continue
5/17/99
on to Step 5. If the Forum determines that the feedlot does not meet the designation
criteria, a letter will be sent to the owner stating that the feedlot does not meet designation
criteria, however the owner must submit a permit application, if he has not already done
so, for a permit to correct pollution problems that may exist.
5. Produce Findings of Fact
If the Feedlot Permit Forum decides that the feedlot should be designated as a CAFO,
staffwill prepare a Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Order (Order) for issuance by the
Commissioner or the appropriate designated staff. The Findings portion of the Order will
include, but not limited to, the information outlined in Attachment 1.
During this process staff will send a letter to the feedlot owner explaining the MPCA' s
intent to designated their feedlot as a CAFO. The letter should include:
. an outline of how the owner has the opportunity to send the MPCA any information
or evidence that may be relevant to this determination;
. a copy of the inspection report;
. the number of days the owner has to respond or submit comments to be included in
the Findings.
Any information that is sent in will be included in the Order's Findings.
6. Issue Final Order Designating the Feedlot a CAFO
Route the Order and letter up through the Administrative Chain for signature by the
Commissioner or appropriate designated staff. Ensure EP A Region 5 is copied on the
letter.
Include in the letter:
. a copy of Findings of Fact.
. that the owner must submit an application for a NPDES permit within 30 days of
receipt of the letter.
After such designation is made on a feedlot, public information documents shall be
prepared to notify the public that the feedlot is considered a significant discharger to
waters of the State and is being regulated under the federal clean water act and state water
quality rules.
5/17/99
Attachment 1
Findings of Fact
The Finding of Fact will include, but not limited to, the following items:
a history of the site;
how the site was considered to be designated
copy of letter( s) sent to owner
process of how owner can submit relevant information
time frame of when information must be submitted
information sent in by the feedlot owner
copy of the inspection report
decisions made
conclusions
order
5/17/99
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PLANNING REPORT
4B
CONSIDER VARIANCES TO MINIMUM LOT AREA AND
STRUCTURE SETBACK TO THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER
MARK (OHWM) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5690
FAIRLAWN SHORES TRAIL FOR ROCK CREEK HOMES,
LLC, (Case File #00-083)
LOT 34, FAIRLAWN SHORES
STEVEN HORSMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
_X_ YES NO
FEBRUARY 12, 2001
The Planning Department received a variance application from Rock Creek Homes, LLC
(applicant), representing Christopher Rooney (owner), for the construction of a single
family dwelling with attached garage on the property located at 5690 Fairlawn Shores
Trail SE (Exhibit A Survey).
The following variances are requested:
1) A 418 square foot variance to permit a lot area of 7,082 square feet for the lot to
be utilized for single-family detached dwelling purposes, rather than the required
minimum 7,500 square feet [Ordinance Section 1104.902: Nonconforming Lot (1)];
2) A 2.1-foot variance to allow a structure setback of 51.2 feet from the ordinary
high water mark (OHWM) elevation of 904 feet, rather than the required setback
of 53.3 feet as determined by setback averaging [Ordinance Subsection 1104.308
(2) Setback Requirements For Residential Structures].
DISCUSSION:
Lot 34, Fairlawn Shores was platted in 1923. The subject lot is a riparian lot located
within the R-1 (Low Density Residential) and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) Districts. The
lot dimensions are 50 ft. by 144 ft. by 50.14 ft. by 140 feet for a total lot area of 7,082
square feet (Exhibit A Survey). The lot is considered a nonconforming platted lot of
record. The property owner does not own either of the adjacent properties.
The first variance request is for 418 square feet to allow a buildable lot area of 7,082
square feet. A minimum lot area of 7,500 square feet is required for a lot to be
considered a buildable lot without a variance.
L:\OOFILES\OOV AR\OO-083\RptOO-083PC.DOC Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
,'"
The second variance request is for 2.1 feet to permit a structure setback of 51.2 feet
from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The applicant submitted a certificate of
survey utilizing setback averaging for the adjacent structures along the shoreline within
150 feet of the subject property and this accounts for the setback average of 51.2 feet
(Exhibit B Setback Average). However, the setback averaQinQ from the OHWM is
determined based on the nearest adiacent lot with an existinQ principal structure; staff
has determined the correct setback averaQe to be 53.3 feet. In cases where only one of
the adjacent lots has a principle structure, the average setback of the adjacent structure,
and the next structure within 150 feet may be utilized (Ordinance Subsection 1104.308
(2) Setback Requirements For Residential Structures). In this case, there are
structures on both lots immediately adjacent to this site.
The front yard setback was determined on a certificate of survey by setback averaging
the buildings within 150 feet along the same block front of the subject lot as depicted on
Exhibit B, as required by the ordinance. The average setback for the five buildings is
35.5 feet, as proposed by the applicant on Exhibit A, the certificate of survey
(Ordinance Subsection 1102.405: Dimensional Standards (4)].
The side yard setbacks are 6.18 feet to the east side lot line, and 9 feet on the west side
lot line for a combined sum of the side yards of 15.18 feet. The minimum building
separation is 16.63 feet to the nearest structure on the adjoining lot. The structures
eaves/overhangs are no greater than 1 foot and do not encroach to within 5 feet of an
adjoining lot. Nonconforming lots of record may have side yards of not less than five
feet with the .structure as proposed [Ordinance Subsection 1101.502: Required
Yards/Open Space (8)].
The proposed two-story structure consists of a finished main level of approximately 983
square feet and includes a great room, dining room, kitchen, 1/2 bath, laundry room and
foyer area. The 469 square foot tuck-under two stall tandem garage completes the
ground level area of 1,452 square feet. The 2nd floor includes a master bedroom with
bath and closet, with two additional bedrooms and one bathroom (Exhibit C Building
Plans).
The proposed impervious surface coverage area totals 2,122 square feet. The lot area
of 7,082 square feet allows for a total coverage area of 2,125 square feet. The structure
meets the maximum allowable impervious surface area of 30% (Exhibit D ImperviOUS
Surface Calculations). The lowest floor level is proposed to walk out to the lakeside.
The proposed walkout level will require a pervious surface area, such as a wood
platform with a minimum of 1/4 inch deck board separation and a maximum height of 29
inches to avoid structure setback requirements and to meet the definition of a pervious
surface area (Ordinance Subsection 1104.306).
Department of Natural Resources Hydrologist Patrick Lynch submitted comments on
this request. In essence, the DNR is not opposed to the proposed variance provided the
correct setback averaging is utilized, and the applicant is advised that any future
requests for a variance to add a deck will not be viewed favorably by the DNR (Exhibit
E DNR Letter).
L:\OOFILES\OOV AR\OO-083\RptOO-083PC.DOC
Page 2
Staff has determined that a legal alternative building envelope exists, which meets the
front yard set back of 35.5 feet as proposed, and meets the lakeside setback averaging
of 53.3 feet. This provides for a building footprint of approximately 47.9 feet by 34 feet
for a total area of 1,628.6 square feet.
A resident adjacent west of the subject lot submitted a letter with views opposed to the
requested variances (Exhibit F Resident Letter).
VARIANCE HARDSHIP STANDARDS
1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a lot, or where by
reason of exceptional topographical or water conditions or other extraordinary
and exceptional conditions of such lot, the strict application of the terms of
this Ordinance would result in peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional
or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in developing or using such lot
in a manner customary and legally permissible within the Use District in which
said lot is located.
Regarding variance request number 1, the lot area is a condition over which the
applicant/owner has no control. The subject property is a nonconforming platted lot
of record, and was developed when current ordinances did not exist. Without the
variance to lot area the property remains unbuildable. However, variance request
number 2 does not meet the hardship criteria as a legal alternative building foot print
exists that meets the required setback averagtAg from the ordinary high water mark.
2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to the
property or immediately adjoining property, and do not apply, generally, to
other land or structures in the Use District in which the land is located.
Variance request number 1: the existing conditions of the lot area and dimensions
are peculiar to the property, and generally do not apply to most other lots within the
Shoreland District. Variance request number 2: If all required setbacks are applied,
there is a buildable area on this lot.
3. The granting of the proposed Variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the owner.
Without a variance to lot area the site is not buildable (Variance 1). A legal
alternative site precludes the need for variance request number 2.
4. The granting of the proposed Variance will not impair an adequate supply of
light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in
the public streets, increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety.
The granting of the requested variances (lot area and setback) will not impair light
and air to adjacent properties or increase congestion, danger of fire or endanger
public safety.
L:\OOFI LES\OOV AR\OO-083\RptOO-083PC.DOC
Page 3
5. The granting of the Variance will not unreasonably impact on the character
and development of the neighborhood, unreasonably diminish or impair
established property values in the surrounding area, or in any other way
impair the health safety, and comfort of the area.
The granting of the variance to lot area will not adversely affect the above stated
values. However, encroaching upon the established lakeside setback average will
adversely affect the adjacent properties and defeat the purpose and intent of the
setback averaging regulations.
6. The granting of the proposed Variance will not be contrary to the intent of this
Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
The granting of the variance to lot area on nonconforming lots of record is not
contrary to the intent of the Ordinance or the Comprehensive Plan as long as all
other ordinance criteria can be met. However, the granting of variance to lakeside
setback averaging will be contrary to the intent of this Ordinance and the
Comprehensive Plan.
7. The granting of the Variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the
applicant but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable undue hardship or
difficulty.
Without the first variance request no new structure can be built, and hardship exists
and is not merely a convenience to the applicant. The second variance will allow the
applicant to construct what they proposed.
8. The hardship results from the application of the provisions of this Ordinance
to the affected property and does not result from actions of the owners of the
property.
The lots area and dimensions are existing conditions and not a result of actions of
the property owner. The setback variance request is a result of the actions of the
applicant/owner.
9. Increased development or construction costs or economic hardship alone
shall not be grounds for granting a Variance.
Hardship is created by the existing lot area conditions, and financial considerations
alone are not the grounds for granting this variance request.
RECOMMENDATION:
The subject property is a nonconforming platted lot of record and staff feels all of the
variance hardship criteria have been met with regards to lot area staff therefore
recommends approval of Variance number 1. However, as proposed the setback
averaging does not meet the variance hardship criteria. The staff recommends denial of
Variance number 2.
L:\OOFILES\OOV AR\OO-083\RptOO-083PC.DOC
Page 4
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the requested variances to lot area and deny the setback variance request.
2. Approve all the variances requested by~ the applicant. In this case, the Planning
Commission should direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings approving the
Variance requests.
3. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose.
4. Deny the application because the Planning Commission finds a lack of demonstrated
hardship under the zoning code criteria. In this case, the Planning Commission
should direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings denying the Variance
requests.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
Two actions are required:
1. Motion and second adopting Resolution 01-005PC, approving a 418 square foot
variance to permit a lot area of 7,082 square feet, rather than the required
minimum area of 7,500 square feet for a lot to be utilized for a single family
detached dwelling purposes.
, \
2. Motion and second adopting Resolution 01-006PC, denying a 2.1-foot variance
to permit a structure setback of 51.2 feet, rather than the required 53.3 feet as
determined by setback averaging from the ordinary high water mark of 904 feet.
L:\OOFILES\OOV AR\OO-083\RptOQ-083PC.DOC
Page 5
RESOLUTION 01-005PC
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A 418 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT
A LOT AREA OF 7,082 SQUARE FEET FOR A LOT TO BE UTILIZED FOR
SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING PURPOSES, RATHER THAN THE
REQillRED MINIMUM AREA OF 7,500 SQUARE FEET
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Rock Creek Homes, LLC, has applied for a variance from the Zoning Ordinance in
order to permit the construction of a single family dwelling located in the Rl (Low
Density Residential) and SD (Shoreland) Districts at 5690 FairlawnShores Trail,
Prior Lake, MN, and legally described as follows:
Lot 34, Fairlawn Shores, Scott County, Minnesota
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in
Case File #00-083PC and held hearings thereon on February 12,2001.
3. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the
health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property
values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. Because of existing lot area conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding
property, it is possible to use the subject property in such a way that the proposed
variance will not result in the impairment of an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent properties, unreasonably increase congestion in the public streets, increase
the danger of fire, and danger to the public safety, unreasonably diminish or impair
health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other respect be contrary to the Zoning
Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
5. The pre-existing lot of record does not meet the current Ordinance for minimum lot
area in the Rl District. This situation creates an unbuildable lot and a hardship with
respect for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
owner.
1:\OOfiles\OOvar\OO-083\aprvrs.doc 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
6. There is justifiable hardship caused by the minimum lot area required today and th~
platted lot of record. Reasonable use of the property does not exist without the
granting of the variance to permit a buildable lot for a single family dwelling.
7. The granting of the Variance will not" serve merely as a convenience to the applicant,
and is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship.
8. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. The variance will not serve merely as a
convenience to the applicant, and is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship.
9. The contents of Planning Case File #00-083PC are hereby entered into and made a
part ofthe public record and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the
following variance for the proposed structure as shown in the certificate of survey labeled
Exhibit A Survey:
1. A 418 square foot variance to permit a lot area of 7,082 square feet rather than the
required minimum area of 7,500 square feet for a lot to be utilized for single family
detached dwelling purposes.
The following are conditions which must be adhered to prior to the issuance of a building
permit for the proposed structure:
1. The permit is subject to all other City Ordinances and applicable agency
regulations.
2. The resolution must be recorded and proof of recording submitted to the Planning
Department pursuant to Section 1108.400 of City Code. An Assent Form must be
signed pursuant to Section 1108.400 of the City Code, the variance will be null
and void if the necessary permits are not obtained for the proposed structure
within one year after adoption ofthis resolution.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on February 12,2001.
Thomas E. V oOOof, Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
1:\OOfiles\OOvar\OO-083\aprvrs.doc
2
RESOLUTION 01-006PC
A RESOLUTION DENYING A 2.1 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 51.2
STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
RATHER THAN THE REQIDRED MINIMUM 53.3 FEET AS DETERMINED BY
SETBACK AVERAGING
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Rock Creek Homes, LLC,(applicant) and Christopher Rooney (owner) have applied
for variances from the Zoning Ordinance in order to permit the construction of a
single family residence with attached garage on property located in the R-l (Low
Density Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following
location, to wit;
5690 Fairlawn Shores Trail, legally described as Lot 34, Fairlawn Shores,
Scott County, MN.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in
Case #00-083PC and held hearings thereon on February 12,2001.
3. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the
health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property
values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, the
proposed variance will result in the impairment of an adequate supply of light and air
to adjacent properties, unreasonably increase congestion in the public streets, increase
the danger of fire, and danger to the public safety, unreasonably diminish or impair
health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other respect be contrary to the Zoning
Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
5. A legal building envelope that meets the required setback averaging for the structure
exists on the subject lot. The applicant has control over the house design and shape,
such that the hardship created has been created by the applicant. Reasonable use of
the property exists with a smaller building footprint.
1:\OOfiles\OOvar\OO-083\dnyres.doc 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
6. There is no justifiable hardship caused by the required lakeshore setback as
reasonable use of the property exists without the granting of the variance.
7. The granting of the variance, as ongimilly requested, is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The
variance will serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is not necessary to
alleviate demonstrable hardship. The factors above allow for an alternative structure
to be permitted with a reduced variance or none at all.
8. The contents of Planning Case 00-083PC are hereby entered into and made a part of
the public record and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby denies the
following variance for a future single family dwelling and detached garage as shown in
attached Exhibit A;
1. A 2.1 foot variance to permit a structure setback of 51.2 feet from the ordinary high
water mark of 904 feet, rather than the required 53.3 foot setback as determined by
setback averaging.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on February 12, 2001.
Thomas E. V oOOof, Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
1:\OOfiles\OOvar\OO-083\dnyres.doc
2
Location Map
'I~,
Location of
5690 FairlawnShores Tr
23
13 6 5 4 3 2
12 8
ROAD
8 7 6 5 3 2 2
4
4 3
6 2 9
1
14 15 16 17 18
N
A
100 0 100 200 Feet
~-
---.................... .......
---------------
--T --.:::::.. ~ ~ _-==-~ ~~
------
---
50.14 N8oo05'14"W
---~
" -
"'- - - -1; --:::::7~
~.~. 5~ _
-... ..., ""- - - --/~.., UN< . ~,
' . -----
50.00 578'J6'J7"( _ __
LOT 34
-==+.::::
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I ~
I N
J 'I'
... I
{:! I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
.. IROM'foo "
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
G
977.(J1(
>
W
. - >9"-
.............................
._~ ----
...-~9.,J.,...... __
-.............................
..........................
~
UJ
<C
I-
-
m
-
::t
><
W
~
~
~
t
~
~
G'"
"
C;;
8
o'~
.:1:
-
F" AIRt..A WIv
I
I
I
I
J.
.,
.,:
~ I r'\"T"
I L.V I
I
I
I
---J......
-----
_r-
.. -,
"..""
w
C)
-=t
a:
w
~
~
o
-=t
to
t-
W
en
m
t-
-
to
-
:J:
><
W
. " - - - ...c ~Iari '=::~ <Jo.x~1
~..c 0 ~ N u t= ~ ., ,.,.., cu..c. 0 a..v _ _
W t... t... t... '-
m Q.Q.Q.Q.
I
I-- _ -..."
,_ 9--
w
~
<(
~
0::
o
0::
0...
'" ~ I~'
f~, III
:J ~ /, II g
::1 II !
8@/' , 8
~81 I ~
i;, /J~
~c.J
B;~
I I
/~ C- ~.~~
rl /- -S'i~
, /
1 t-- ~'c?~
/. /
1 l-
I. I
1 /
/. '-
1 / "-6"ir_
I. C
J / ~'I~
I
I
I
I
I
-.... I
""~ --I
I
I 'I
/
/
/
/
I
/
~'c?~ --J
I
/
I
,
z
-
I
/
/
/
/
/
/
I
/
I
~.~ --J
/
/
/
/
~c?~ /
I
/
/
/
I
/
'~c?--I
-.I
--
~
~
V)
,,4./ I..1j
00> n-
o'-o'-l....
0'0
V) t:> ;:c
/!:C/)
CI)
~
~
~
--
~
'0
EXHIBIT C BUILDING PLANS
." & ....h. ,I .'.~.. f.a'i',' ',. t ~ ',.t,'.~'I~I:i'!:"'''' l;~':~I: :..,'.:.J'.~..:~,,~,,)'J ,; .1
':!'''''''lli',i~~;~'fi.;J.?''''>:~ .:"'; Vr!L""~l""'l'f;'<.;~,~ '''/').?i~:...,.~''f'r":t':;-''~''~'''('}~~':;.,.r'':;i~1:;~:),. . ,/":-.'" ,: ,. '.}<'~''''
i~ I .IL-' ~, ~. " . '. ~., ,. ;,- !" '1'~;'~." ;tI~f\.:~'q,'Ul-.(I;~"'JI: :.:r.~~-t.;;"~\..,'l,l. .1. ~.'_~ ~:';;~):",;,:..l.:...".........,".,.....
,.~~'~.i'for"~'';~~'''''~''1':\4J~'/l:~:f:~!..~~lr':lJ:.r~'..~}J'f.l:~"l;:'t~1.'.'~:;[Jlr.~ . j. ~J~~..' 'rjo/;~~'~j;~fIo,i.~', '''',';_.''',1 ,"~"'ljl~I~I;:"'l~ " ~. ..., . .. ~;r',
N,,\..(lf;:'t~iSif:I~~~', ,~{~:t:; '(.i\:'\"'~hr~~ri'!::r.1.r~'.! ~f-\f'~f;~!~}~..t':;:;'(~iJ;411 i??/ . \ 'b'~ " ""'~;~\~1""f. ;''''.~. :--.' , ,;,.., '. ~.'\ "'~' ./ ,<. <I '1'2.:~' .,~:;ji~J;C';".'i",'"':''' .' 'I;:
'~' {rffl' ~tq:'I{'" {'t.. ,.,...,.~. Ir~ ;((,.. t 1. ,.': ,\/1.':1," "."t... i~~..:lt'i.~' ~~1t:. 'r' ~,..{~'. ,.,I~". .~ ~. . ~ . ":--..... ~t:." . \.
'.~l '. r: .. '~.~I);\1ti;:.~j .. . ,t.~..,~ ;~~. r~ ;_:\ ~r::1:!:~~!:~r'i-' ,~:,,!f.:,{.1,,:rr, :~'\:",;,:;:~"~.r.1t'f~rl.", w i ~.lf~~.t..tl.Il,~'t\'J:l':.~ ~~ "".t"f-:, :',~'~; .' . \ .'\ .:~ ': ,~J I . I . '. " . "'\~'~~~'" .~'~~1:~~.;r
"~~. 't. . I'.:t.. '~..' '~for. r..~ ..:t:. ~'1..:t t...1\, "-l;',..~tv'l{ II .:t Jt~.. ~'1fll~~ ~'1.' j~H"" 'J." 1~1 . '. .' .,t, .... .....f .,L...,'y:..t-:'..,.1. f'.w-,., "~r-:-
,-if ~'C!1';L\o~~\..~,~~-,~..~~~:l.~!t,i":.:\ll'.I/.~I~.j"f'~~':f:'~~:""\~:,;..~ti~~~,"~i-t~~t~';il" {}i'~Vl:~~'~!.!...1J.~~~,.'~r...... ~~:",';~.~l~'~.' ~'It.. .,':\>.. . J .,~"....;._,...... .. ;o)'t1'I. , .~.~. r../\,ll.
11!u..,' "l~.,..t}''!.'tt'''''''.'~'~.:'"I.~tl'.:/I''t~'''~:'''~~!:~!'\'~~I"~",.:;~\....~l' ~,*,,"_t "',:,J:,~.,: .~""'\~';' ~~~1':'ti:'r;j,':' ..' I,',.r '\',' r~. ':..' .':':"'~'~;,~,;,"';Il.'.":l'''':'~'''~
if':"~ f .~. ',. .~1'." ")', ")oll.~.~ I 't<~"" ,If' 'ft4'''\"' '.(';tt."1',.. 1"':"'I"",t':~"l~,r,I.'" ~>I" ..... '/1'1' '.;.. '1' '",,'t>' .,. ...... ~ ..'
;..11;' ~,~'1~l:~'~f"tl~~lllt\(lO""~k.U.~"'~4~.v, f~U"~I~ ' .~'" :' "h;' j 5~J/!' ~~...=/. ~ .! ~',,,I:' '-"":;~~;'~':"'~:i,.l.. -' t. '~:'; .:- . ~ ,.:.. ", ..~., :,,),~ ..-f.( , . :'("~r.'f'r'>1~....~':"~:::,;" .' '~..~ ':".'
;'~11t';.r<:'1! ~. ~ '1- :"-:rr.:"'."".. .... 'H~~~r:;ll~~.ti.:r~;t.:(1j ':ll::' t' ~"'" ~'.;j'; '''K:\'~~ t:, ,: r'11':.~jlt ~~:. J' . ',J. 'j' . ': '" t ~ . ~ ~ , ..; .', .~. .>:'.. . r.. ..~.t.,:....';"';'~ '('n;," ..,t...:~
~};!\,trl'-~ i!7'~~II?i~.1,.;I.,f;\'.:1:~;'\t~rT,....~...S.i;l\? '1' ~"~L' ,.,' -....'fi. ~.A';i).i:~..~~'i!ri~:j.:.l;;;.-:..'\.:"'. '.' ....'!ll:. '. ~I.;,_i::I::. '?;':'. "."".'.'~.'/':['t': ';:\"'I~~'i:':'.
,~'l'\;')"~_~t''J'I'','''.(r)''':'''I[l\ ..I'f''''~ ,I i. ~ (;'\~. . I' ':',~ " ''':0::''', J-l' I'.,./. ~,'~\'~t,'~".,J~~ ~ .' ., ',. I -:.. '.. ,., 4~"'1'1' ....,. ,'1...~.~,.'1. ~ .... .:'
<''If;';Il-=.r-bill14..,.-,ii~:l'':.I')..t\'d~ "'~1t~r~j~71~.. " .,~:..,', ",l~I~".~~""t;'..,d..~,...'".......v.~"k._',", .:..',".1 ,~. t :t':'~ ".'(':";'.~'I'~_=..t,., ...)....;y-,.'t."........:;..
'('. ~\,.Il:f.~.s~....."..,:.......,,:),,:. \\'l;r't'.I!t....;'(.n...u~I...~~.' -7 .~ '," '~r:~:.).t.j;J...J~ ~"...'l",\..,~~..\'...:.~..'.. \ '~~" ~ ....,:..-'..1 ..:..:.~.'''l:'..' .........:f.,'.."..(. r,....~
:'~~t\ .~i~.~, rJ..~i~:.\' . f:~" ,'l'~ ~J"~. .r..\~,~..~I;t ~~I'Ir';HIt.";~t~~~' . ...,,::-6 ~...,.-\. ,,~~'i:''''':'. ~t X;r~.t~~ ~lar.l ..;.:!::t;t~rj':1 ),' _'. ,r ". . . .:' : ~,:' :.1."\:\' .:~,.,.~i"~'i~~:~' :~.. ;::I~;'~ I) _~lai:.
,J'..-"'~ I ~ ...,.... .t'.'~I'>,\,,"Y...t l.v.~.. 'f,..,' ,'tt'PJ".l;.;Jl"'Wft"~~ol.' ~.' . ! I',.'::a-",.',~,'" '.~ ~
~~;.1,~ ..l::...."*-.l,~..tiA:'i ....'1,.,. ", i .;."'J " .\i . ' ." ,... c ~{.: J."~ 1"'::" .'~ ,41'.' ,t .. .',. _~. ,.' " " ',~ '~';."f' ,f. '.'
~/PA'~ I>~' ,.~ ;..r.;:,.".. "'..~~ ':j.~~. tJ~t.~~.~.':' ;-::-y ..:., ',Ai .~(~' -.I't . ;<0- r,,,~: '" . ~ ,t" A',;/ \l~,.', ~l;;) 1;_ f ',. / ~~'.. .1. " \~!' '~' I ~.~. . ~~'\ " "1;-.:, ,,:
.-.~.'i~:t.1':"'it.t,''''',iY.'.\iL,.-~....,'i1t,;~.''i:f~'''''''Ji..'')",s:..'''',,"!J.. 'V fl.'.'.''''' ".1:'; , "- . 1. '.;J',..y...:., .,t,t.... . ":1 It ~I...(: .... '."l4" .'.'
f":~l~;' r.: ....'.::tlr~: .' ~l~" \.. ;/' 'r'. \ ',,;;. l;~~rf' ;.1: ,,~;j) ;~..,";,.' ~./ 8 '. . . " . .' P.r..~,," ' , .f': :,~ ::..:;~ .:. ~ ~~~\~" ',' .. l "0>' ~,.. .....f "'i,.I~~ '~'.
'IElI~..art..' u:"1ltt. 'LJ..O f \ ~.I~"i ~. " .' ~:,,,,,,/:ff. . /"1 . ~. ....,\\~:~~,.., . .'~'~'?I~I~";I' ~;: ~~. . .... ,I ~ J < i ,'; :.~' ~'~'>'. '1~,: ;. ',''''''"
L~I r;~ ~;~~r.:~$T~. JI~J.j~.J~Ml:~r~~i~'* / ~/:~'''':'' :. . .... ';" ..\....< ~ ..::~, . " '::t+~~;\"':'l': '.' ": f ; '\: " .. ,.,..\:..;t,> ,:,'>'.-.<,
~7~'.:,1,i ~",'~;~'\'#1\~~,'~"""'{:~'\".!""') '."''''''''''''' \..L....,.tol."~,.:'-". .;ql',..,'.'t.... ~ ."- I ,,:.:""'..~.~...~~:.::.........~.\t...
I,~j ~"JfM') .~,...."....~~~~,... .,......',..r~...h.............. . ' ..
'<1:': .l.~ :'" '1"1; f." ,I. t' ..' ,:"&I~"" . .,~ . . . . ~ .',
""'tt. ..,..:.,t.I";-;'f....~..~....Il'~~" ~-". , ,," . .,
.""":r;..,.Joi~..,~r.."ot:.fPI ~,.jl'~,~.\li~~ I~II.,..' .~\.,Jo"s-~~;;'J':'t ..... ,f.. ...... ;,
;;....~!l,~.t..:".::.,~,.~:l'\,... ..'.~r..,..~..,. ""J,;;;.;;;. ~.~~!I>l.I".<rll" <",.,' 1','1..~ "'," .... .1..;;. '~.' 1"/,:'
1~~.4~H"::-it.,"'.'..:.~\~.".:.'.'....:.;-:,' '1:", . ..... .~~)!:i['\-t.~1; . :,.,,"~:; ~tB.. /',.
. """':".""-'" ".,' "''';;:.,.,1 ,.,.~.:"..!{",.. 'l~~'l.'f.:l' ..,l~mE3 ,. tEl ..../' ~
':,,:,.......~.~\~..~-.t'il'..l~..t'('~\~~.,.~ /., .:-:. ,.r. ~~;~fj~t...\'J... ~.~, ~ .... '." , .~..J'-.~..~,.r.~. ,',
:~'..r.P,~tl.;r.".14f.;.:.:.~'1't:J.t:~ ..~:~. ,1,.1. \~ ~:'. I ~ \~ ,f;.;~~~;~':t);."*i~. ,:" .",...." ..' ...,,~,,~. .'~
<:I;;~If:;~i:'T'''' 'n,:~~ ,~, '. ..It "~1 . ;.t.'i ""!:' . '1r~";.\"';.<iI t .~l4: ..~.';J '". ., , ".. ." '1,:lvr:~. ,.;;
:..~~~~::' ':)"'~"~;'~'pG.."pr:D~ ,'. ..~, "." j"" 'i;"l::~';~.f"" ~~';i:~ ~ I." .. '.'.- ,. ;'t., ~ .. "~"'" ~ II
{~~,:.l~' J "~~.~I ~~t'.l; Y' ...:j'" ~ ;~.~ ~ ." J. j ,;io\,.;(f~Ij.:'i!~"'~': ~J f,' '.~' r .,"'," .;/1 .;' .,tt..... 'j 1..1... . . " :~.'.~. ii:'~'~:'::'~':"'.:;~.;.~..'...;~:::'I' '. .~.~ : .'
";,~~t~~;'1!~~\ tt,"l'~ rJ)\:ir~"''::''li~ ': ':. , ~tol~.;t~t:l'f 11~-J"\'~'~'~;.fiU ":~i;,~""~'~ ;..,.. :r.~~:;' ,A:\~\: l. > ,-_,,:: .'. :
1i~"~:j~.,:J:'M~~~ ~');;'K\{\;",pt} .' :'" ,~.:;. ~\~~\~~: ":JI,;W ',W?;.,\1,,'~ ,~'- " , .1 .:::... ~\
. .,'" -,(,'-""";,/;'/ "i"""I"'",; ,<J;<'W.lj~ ,..." iii:".;:"",,!M<I-.' .', ,', .~
ttill~~~~~\1r;;~~~;~;,~~1.J~::it'\~:'h~. : ~',;":~ ";'t~-I'.(:j;~.; ,l.'\J" 'i}\i~\~(;l; .~~; ",:,:~~,I; ......- ........ ~.. ;.'
~ ~..lK' ~ '. .'" . "",1, l"'~'hr. .l,.t '.. .' , :1'0: , ' 'I '.~
~1~~,r;-1"u::g". ~.' ,~~M.._$i",: "I2.t.' /.....,;~. ',:'t{f-'..~.~.~...I.t.I,~ .. ..''''''''''. .'.'~,J: ~:~.'t ,. '. '.~:r ... . ".,c.... '. .i.....,;: I" .... .
-~Ji ~,-, p ~ - - - '.,. - - '.' ~ t ."'~i ~"~~;~'''''I I;'.",,;' ..L"'{.ti:;.~;J.J~-~S ~<~",;);f':" ~,j;"..' .. '~, .;.-' .,---;;-;-, .; ~.,-" "~:'..I:~<l~'.~ :,. " ......., ~ .:~' p-.. ~...~. ;')";' _4:: ..'-' .' .... '::"
:rr4~".~,'!J:,~:,.IJf.t"tJ,.~\.:,.;J:"tt;~;{"i .'; .",,;..,'1 '. ....
_t . '(' "",~-.;~~-:- .'"':' ....~.': ~...;...'_1!~ ..... ..l :-r::::J.(-....h'.t~.. (".' .t'~~~... .~. ,_., _ ~ '
"~,..,..I!:.IJ:...~......:',...,.. ," ,.,.. ,',/' ....,. _" .'
,'-;-::', 'I ~ x~'; 4 ~ ..t..J.t.iJ( ..,........ ~,1'~..,~ - - - - - - ~
"It' I.., ,'-" . ....-.__ ~ '..'1. '1, ';;'_;' -
tI' :tiz4j';'~,~,~ -:;", ::., !,~t: I:~:;'.;li' ":
'. ~~J*~~~~~r"tM::~~')W "
~ 1l,,'J'. i..~ ~..!:1f'. ;...;,t. ".~. '~p_I_'",V!::"-
\~V~~...",;.\, "'tJ"~,-,,,,;~~~ tv.,. ~~ '1''-;'''- .l.~ 1~;~>>~. I
.It'io(('!<I''' "...~.. ~'I"': "I'c""""'~~
.. I,. ." r.ll'1 .....' ...... t.,.' " "'. ....oj.
, ""~, ,~I ... "\"f' 'I....' tit. Ii' i,1 ~~J" '/~:" .
'1"";'" w . .~1I't'. . Al.'" 1'; ',!i'
,:r\<<;; i:i "~"l""'i'!f.';,~\~~~ 't:l...rJ~;... -
1fhl. ~ I'. J1-'i:~.~'4'~ .....~:'
1i. l},t ~.,_..."",r~lo' .~, '.
[ft/t ,.';t~.W~~li
;~t . "2~;;t~.
~ . ~:Li;~~~~"
:i .' " ~.:i~~'
-.; .l<~.,,\.
l~~.~~: ~
.~:~p t.
-'~ :~~~\.:; ~ 1*' - .'. '..\.... "~.~
<{,.~'<~.~~~~:;;r::~~1ii .~"}':~.. .- F", ''''.. ~. " .,::..~'<.' :
\~~~" ~1.~~i;~t1rr2lif.r5{t:~~t~~'~. ",:~~:~"";-~,~,, '''~''p~'~:'':H':''~'\'' ... h' ..-:..':, '.1;' ,.'.' .'"< . " ,,'.':
'f"""j "'Ir~;; ',:....'f ,.., ;;~r~~~',jfl'"'\ ~ ;,,'0" " ,'~.,:. t,...".1.'~r~~\~<\;.,,~ ....'~~.l. ;-1",' I ';}'.:'~'.' '. ,:~".~' "_'i'':'J:.. ....... ,1:., \.' )~':;....; .'....~ .' :
.r4:" ';;/:~'r~:ri~f'~~'i:l;r.t{i'1.l;;'': '( 1\ .... '. . ..1" ",':' ~ ..;.t.... '" ...... .~', ..... ~(.,~ll ~,.~.
,;,~. ,.r. .1.,,,. I c.'l~-'il'\d~
ht; l.i-;f,).,.;~;~',i;',:,,~" b~,;, ."'~" .....-{..~ '~. H'"
)~ ~', ::t}~:,~.j il;'~"'If. (~~!;.\ ) : i;.(~~ ~i~l' ~:~,. :1: ( :~.
;;!~;~ i,~' ~,~...,tlf""k-,...,j~r.r,t~,'" . ,,'.~, .. \ ~;'!"l!'~ f ~
'~f!~. '';:'r~~~.':~:~~f/i2~ -.i:t! I r :" . ~ ;. :' ,. ,~...~ ,~,;j~ ';i
''I''l~' ...t...,L....,.... .~ i. ,'."..>.' 11 l' ~ '
i~!"; . l ~ ~ " , r ~ ",
~P,\,! f$:.t:.l,. ',1\: :~ ~. i .' ,\
~'~'.'~ . .~, :: : :I;~'~; ~ : I ~ : : :;'}::: : :.ce,." ,,,,, :'~q:;:~::.". ~,' ~ , '.
':\",\,.: ~~'1r''';~;''';r~i'':'\r';(A.-di.f:l~'.<r#'''' ,.. ''lI;, ;. '. ) ...... .,.', ."-~..,,. ..
:t;~ ;\~~er~~~,.\}:\~~~:~J~,~ ii". . .,~\ .~'~~:. J. ~ " ',". ','"or (....f'..I.~;:.~'.. '..: 'n:.- "'~~-. ~L q.~t~',iI~iJ~.~.}'ti7~':f~.r~~~'~ ~>\;t'f:.,~.:~F~?
~; . ~I-,rl; ~.~ . . . .1.(.... ",~I "'."./,.! , .~~Jl;~..;;,;. ..... 'oJ ....,.~~.Xr,t,h,-y.\,~~~"* "'~l!1"'U';'''.'
~'Ii' q~,' .-'. . "". ,..' . " ...... ..:?""10~~j~'..j\1..V;.;I::; )':;:!t.r~J~:
Wf.Ji!ki,';- '-~:ti~!;~~~t!.;1'~.~~~~i~:l~ lrj:~~.!ii~~~;~~~,\\~~i~~J!I~~~~!~ljI,~:}~~~i~',Vj~;IM~~ i~,'l~itt..I.~i~'.:.\:j.'!.,~.,;..< l '~~/-, " ':\;: I~;';'I ;.).,.~:{;.,... "'> 'r'...~+tJ'
:~r.~.~~ ~;.~:.y:,l~,~,.I:,: ~"'~~,11ft~'\.~.I?,r.~ '~:~,~~r;i .,?!~. ':"fN"'~ ~lj..<~;\t~.,~;;.~:.:: .~':t" '."'! . ,ot :.,l~,' . ~~'~I" i::i'r1, I .... , ,It',. 1 1;.,.',1. "~.'~'I'" :: L . "~~.t.:..
~:i\'1~~ ~~. ~::;II' ~~.'~i"~'';: I'.... .:i ~:. . ; ~;t'..~;" :,-,': ..~~ :.f.." ~.' )A...~ ". "l',~ ..: ;--;i . _, 1.;" V" .: ~ ,"1',. ,". .~:... .... I.' . :~~ 1 ,...,. ~ . .<:: : . i' .,. ," l ~ , "., ,.I't'.t .J ;
., "
, Po-, .~':\ t,
."'.f''''1J?'.!l'l';1':\~!'"i' I .i
:llil'~lf;:~t~l~jt!li . '.
: ..'ilttt-~:,.t~V<i~ i : .i
\ '.';:\"~,:' ~lt.;..,.
J;;(~: '", i'"II C'.
.~?~,? 'lfJ;!:l
,{':l':.,\i t;~'.
. ~.~;,.l.l t~,:~iw1,-:.:"
: ~', 'I" .~ I~l:~ifi
:~:f;~Sf4;j:
'il'>:r I(':~'
;~ "~~ I :':~'~I~.).;;.
.~). 1"(; ~ .~..j
}~:Mr~r~'~ ~:~
. .,,. ;~,.., . ~\l1
~I/.~, )~"~~.~:;'
,;;}~~~::
',";.
~r~~" 1"l'"~'''''
r~.~ ,) t' tiL~ .'~':~~;;
:..., "./ ~ t~f~. ~ .
I,~?:'" .', ~"., ~.~.:;''''{
'.' \
[FE,,' ..
. . . ~.
'.,~ '.'~ .~ . .
. ,
'";~'''
~. ...
~ ,.i~, .:,.
t ,.. \.,
.': I' .~~
" ",t
-} ,,~ .r:!~
'. ,.,,'.
"'. '.1
~'.
'1'."11 ;rt~~~~.;~~t'Jtr~;lii, .~.
. };. .,. -..t;.\~.
'.~ . L' .... . ~'.' :.~. ~
~ ~~ ,l ' '
;~ ...
,.
, ' tt" ; J
;' , ~. .. ~
. , .
'\.'
~. . ,'.... .~',
"'-'';'! ..... 'ole
1:
, . ;.:; . ..;, .j"
till.,.'....
.,;.......,'
"("'.," ..I";.
".
~.;',,<.
,~ . ..
',,- -.
. ..~ ."
;, ;~'
'~f.
'.' .',.
. ..
.'
"
'." .... ....
..110.
,.
"\. .... ~':'.
t!:' . j'" '\o~.'''...: ;.:....:, ;. .':" ~;.:
I '.~
. . ., ;.. ..t. . I ."'t.. . .,,, ~ ..
"I "" <;"'. it(*,.\.y,j;'..'~.."~'",
:' . -,': ..... ,.' .p,.....~ . ~ ~ ".
" ~.:
.... ~ ~~,..'.'4~;"';
r~?f!JI'~4~i~~,:tl -' ., " ..
~;~ <'!~,,. /., y:' " .1' " . ~
rtJLI.;.-,{ ..: . """.' ...
~1.:-r~,~ .J '.. t~,,~: ,.-':""";-;': ~ I' '.
~~'~~l\),'~' ,'- .1....',.' .,,,
;{;;~il'~" fj"~ ' . ., T.' ..'
~~~~.n(1il' :.."-~,l"' ,.' ~~:" .,,';'-
.'
.' . "
'.~' (~~. .~ >..
'. ''',''
I
" ./
.1
.~.t
';;
'J!;
l~ "r~
...:.' t Ii'
~~~ (
'~L,..
~j::'~.
;I~,'n'
.<...... iAl:I..'(":
!. ~..,f"!.I"~.:1,: :'l"~~\' ~ .
.1 ..,il~""~".'
..'~ ,....,~..",.."'/.I,,
t,i~.(~J~il~~;~:..!'~,~ :i:!t' .
,/:"1 \::.i.II,\'!:AtJ:~ .
'~~t~;?:~"t7;~:~f:'~ .
/"'if''''; :li'~li~:;,t.:~ .
'1\ ~".1! ~",:~'i~'+';;.J;:\tk'
t.~c..:' ....,~..':~.~~rl.:
.:.~ tf~'
}~~, ~~;.
".: " tl
. ....
~:~
~ ~':~
'"
J~lJ..i .J
~'
....,.
'~ ~'.~~
','.;,'''1.' ~. ;".':"':;,~,,:,'~l '\':.~lt;~.~~'~t~";!~~. 1:~
~ .,r I'
.~ '. .'.
..~:~ 4 '). (,. !
H.
, ..' .~I;-
.';'::;" \f
.ti i,:
\ ~ 1 )~:7
,,-'- '.
.,.,.. .
..,;.
.~
I.' ,.t,.
:,":I1:'.f
t/,~ l "~'r.'.
...~...~ i
i...rrJ
~l,f.: .
'.,": ~~~1'.
:1,. ..\,
'i.}'V":~'.
ltJ1
tr;l1~:
;..~'il'~'~'
iP1.;
.' ,'\'::':'
'1,..;1"'"
~. ~.. ~ 1: ':.: ...
,r; ..-1"'" :.'.
\.'.'....
'i'
J
"1'"
.', ..~
~. "
."\
.;:"..,.,.....,..........'.:. M
I:;,':" ~p I' .,.~. . .. ., JT
'. ". .".. ,.' .~r
...".;.,~
'1: '..
~ .!,
':.
,>.
: .
" .
:t
; ,
'.J "
i' .
~"'
" ,. ", t
. ."
.. ~;
f.
. '.' ~ ',~ "
, '
I
l
l
:: : :; t.
t.
~,.:
,.f ,~
- . ~
; ~
:.;. "
.~..; i
::"1-
. , ::
J
'I
- ,
!. .
, .
. +'
; ~.; -. ~
-'t' :,'''-''~
, -
~ -:.\.:
.
... -i-
.'~
". 4'
~
, .
: f'
'1
;; 1='..
of ","
,: ';.
1 .-
.
i
.. I~
I
II
i
I
I
'"
i ~ .
. ~ ......:
. '.J t . ._,
5."11'''-''1'-1''''; "1 I 1.11
, '.. .._~ ~- /rr.1t ' (lb. II I I
~~~~IL. ~y ~ ::::~-"~~'-;'-I;:~:~-':~.---~ .:. ':" ":~ ,.. I I I I '"
.''cvF- Fc;.e:t;=:;~f'F,,-r ..I '~~~7,7.';I~'~', ~O '.- I T l~', Wt I, <I!> Ilffi ~ i
~ ':'PP::;k.:,,' ~I . I". n ~~;~/ 1\ .1 /~.
~~~t.'Pj7- u~"- .~. . I ~:. .1-\-"-=-11 +' v I;'
-,'.. .....'~I-. ~ ."''' --.. -..., "I.....I!)._-A.. ':'. .'L..,!......,'=r1- ~..o..:
~ ffinl:~ ...... "'. i.:l . I !3e.1pel> f'1~t ~ "\ J \
.1~ ~. ~ $t!~Di,"u,:rI~!>1/! 'p ..~~ ;..1" ~..,H I:
\ !h PIlL.C;;I.U,,/pb!1 I ~[~ ffi..... -j,IO"a.ft I 1Z';'~"4.w r:. P~p. II ~ ~ I,
- ~ - lD/~ ;~~: ~.'~ /1. (w~ -:l 7;r'.T . @.f ~ . \;
:v P,wl '~ ~~. ~.,~ -~~'i::~4f.'L4 ~')" 'C~I$c;P '"'-'t L.Mp ~ \ Ii
- I ~07\O""iR. 'Lj ~ II.,..; 1:4":)" r"'p/"t'f'l.EPWPc':;>L ~ ':
k tLW~U tJ'~ \.!) YI "1'0' I OL.j ~"~ rti.D. , / 'e; !
. EJr \. @P'l-;;OIi'.IX_.L___-1:..Jd.t,.. / ~ i . I. ~~,",-4
' \ ""I> II....;, "r;..;:;~ '. I~ ~I._~'>> WL.~I F~1t .':'.F:~r..:1,.Iw",-=' _ 'Z ',''> 10'
,! ~ ffi~1L. f"':"-;--T-~-- "r"'-' - - - --.-..--
, ---......., PI".. ~~'---. \ .JIl ~ 9.- .,-i-"-. ..,.::a ~ - -'-'- '-m ~~ ~
,,;.~ / \;ill. ill.J Iii ..... .f-'t;tlUL:tfO't' r n,. ~
( <~ ;' l!."flo:.k:....j I' l1,.. I i I -' i
I 'V~(fb : ..~': ~'t{ ~~ ~, " 'II ;W- I ,:::.:'~';..-~~~_
. . . ':::'.1 .:-~. .1, , ' \ .I 1'<'" IJ . ,..... f'
';~""''9-Q 'i'2;.-1--F 15~_ -~~~ ~-. '/ I>:"'i t ~ I @ ~ . --- :
~ E'-"-t+ .. I;r.JV' -/ r- \ 1n....1> 0() I '
\ '" '. - -' . I IiI{ ~ ,J'" :r I ,I ~c ,'I;
. "oL \(l ./ n " I t (1) II :
, ~;U'D f!~ LE~~'~,' i {:~~ :--1~'1 -:- ~lE~ 'J @ .'
'. irt>. .. '8'_ . ~~. ~r'- 1j,iD__~ _ tri~/;V [~...!'.A /($',
QJJ I I~ n . i f< :~ ~-t1J' ~.. "1 I I
I 2'."=:,",T''-IU~''I..~~L' 'C>.>" " -~'. , I ,- '\ ;HlI -. ;'."-:""'..:..0' I A."L.~
I ;1;j<u 1-' .o;.j,..;I~J4-:-G~r- 1/ .... :-1 -';';": ~ ; ~ ~ - "
10_ '~-~ SI>:;'/-l.. 4''': ., ~'~. - >_ ~~i [b~ -~"+~ II iZ~:~:-~.
I 4'U>t.L(;.forl"'lu'1Ju/"'l.!.lSlStr<. Q CQJ".~IJIL.t'I~ ~.~ 1':.::< r"~@ I ',II '\RI" t
, MeM8~~"'L,.Of"~r""'''''R> I5LloIL..:t'ILJ.. '- I ": I I J" .::..t:.v-
'i~r:- V<>.JI~:>". r I, I"'
.' . . i ~-il"P'I"""'F-~-te.L) 4 w.~ .:l'''''2J~'''''1.. ...." g " "
,. . '. ow. ................:0 .....uP ~ - to- - - - -"- ~ -->-H-tl-I -f..ll 2<=> .~.:> .
'. JO'l"''''=''''''"'OL.j. I'tb.' .. -":"-..IJJ-U jJJ c;.Ut =rOLH
i' 41 ._..~ === _..:.." T -;=.1111 ~"'I..r~r.:>'
I~~ -~r' YA~;'$~@ ". 1.-=-__
IIT1'I .. 01. .m. . I /..... . 12.."12=1"
"tV ~ '0/ 12..I'V'Il. ~
FI":""7",,;:jjpuC-ci6t-pfl.l2.d ~I. ~....'::pr-~~rL;t, ~~7'iL.Ii'll..
II' .~!I . .' . I: I
I ~ ~I I N Z\.lp 1="""~W""~L.IU91
I Pl 1,/ -' Q.~e..Ie."-re4P fL~F-.. I
\ . Iii " ~. .:== .lOI::'!:> t.. "1IJLD. ~r- ~'. I '
I () I - -. - - -: .,-- - - ::J_o",' _
, : . \ . ~~ Il[---------T-j I.
--1-- - --=r.-----~I.../l ~1jC.pejZ_~" I
r =-"'Fz=j ;~~: :~:-=C~~~ I ~ ~.J:~:~:~~;_~-= . --= ,=--= /l~'
~ = . . . .. L..-...;-r '\::l
~;-.... - -- ~.-,.:c..... _ ,.-- -. -:-~ ~-- :.:;1- -~ .
---- - --.- ~ .- c,
1---,...----,--_____ L--
/Z=F- 0... L2- M
.. . GPil-. po...1'Q
· =-.::r..4;l.+........t, .
:;1'F-I."'.:r <U o..j 2. . ll"'-"'I-
), ,-
I
"1
, ':'V~'2.QJ.Ic.
;2..2.'"'Q"tt~jl..
0-'-
,-
.bul:. ~:t\~t'-4
"'''f+2A=
t~,~eit, -
.::..",..,.. ~]~ w/
.z.12. "L.Y\.. H-PfZ.
<=-Pt4... ~'10 "'I
. ""'.</:> 'q,1.~4-:'
qp
~
".
":i:.olz.!
2_;4,"..l
<w
&Z.~'w too.'\,..
I. :z..I.",,-!-
2.,""0"
tt"i'--o.r"-"L,. .
/
';:UI..1' S1'o"
c:.u.t s-r"I.O~
2
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
Impervious Surface Calculations
(To be Submitted with Building Permit Application)
For All Properties Located in the Shor"eland District (SD).
The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent.
Property Address Lor.
:5 4, FCf.;,. I a0N" Shore..>
J
Lot Area 70 f)z.. Sq. Feet X 30% = .............. z J 2 ,5
***********~*******************************~**************~*************
HOUSE
LENGTH
;:'o,tJosev(
,
WIDTH SQ. FEET
x f!PI '1- 0qI'4<;t:.., = J 70q
./
x
=
ATIACHED GARAGE
x
'='
TOTAL PRlNCIPLE STRUCTURE...................... j 70 Y'
DETACHED BLDGS
(Garage/Shed)
x
X
TOT AL DETACHED BUlLDINGS.......................
DRIVEWAYIPAVED AREAS (Jl"oflos.ed
(Driveway-paved or not)
(SidewalkfParking Areas)
x tJ,;\I!'Wq Y
I
=
356
x
=
x
=
3'5'0
TOT AL P.~ VED AREAS.........................................
P A TIOSfPORCHESIDECKS
5-/;000
I
=
=
b'g--
x
X
(Open Dec\c.s '/.- min. o;:Jcning b<:cw~n
beards, with 11 pcr,iells surf.1c~ below,
are not cOli.sid~.::d to be impcrvioiJs)
x
=
TOTAL DECKS..................._..._._......................... h 5?'"
OTHER
=
x
X
" .
=
TOT.o\1. OTl!ER.......-.......-.-- -.-..................- ......
TOTALI~ERVIOUSSURFACE
CmIDE}tIOVER
Prepared By f!a~ 1Jf/t,/'
Company -,-;-;~<, S" t. J-/// / ) /Il C .
[ 2,1 2- 7-
r ,3
Date II /IS/OO
I t
Phone # t&10-60tfQ
m
><
:I:
-
OJ
-
-t
C
-
3:
-a
m
:IJ
<
-
o
c:
en
en
c:
:IJ
~
o
m
o
)>
r-
o
c:
r-
~
-
o
z
SENT BY: DNR METRO;
1-19- 1 3:53PM; 6517727573 =>
6124474245;
#1/1
EXHIBIT E DNR LETTE~'
Minnesota Departmenl of Natural ReS(ll\n~l~S
"~; ,\ :,
M~tro Wat~rs - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-tl793
Telephone: (651) 772-7910 Fax: (65 J ) 77'J.-7t}77
Jallll,1ry 19.2001
Sieve' H(lrsllIan
City of PrioJ' Lake
J (,200 Eagle Cteek ^ VI;lI1UC S E
Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372
RE: Varianl:~s to Lot Area and Lake Set.back, Rock Creek Homes (5690 F,lirlawn Shores) & Appeal
of Stafr Dc.cision NOl LO Pennit aCl~l;ssory StnlcllJre on Twin Island (John & l.indi.l M~yer)
Deal' Mr. II000sITU.Ill:
I h....ve reviewed I.he nHllcri~lls you submitted relative lc.) the two subjecl zoning mattcrs and ofkr Lh~
following COTnmcnLS for consideratiou.
Minimum I .ul Area and Lake Slltback V itriances. (tuck Creek Humes (S.6.90Ji'airlawn Shc~rcs Trail I
DNR is not opposed to the proposed variance provided tl,lC footprint of the sLructure is cOllsislenl wilh Ih"
<lvcrag.~~ setoack of rIll; structures on adjoining parcels. The structlll'C on l.lujacent Lot 35 appears 10 be set
hack 6:2.43 feet fl'Olll the ordinary high water elevation. It is not cknr if Lhere is a strlll;Lllre 011 (~d.iaccnt
I.ot 33. or what tht: sedlack of a structure on t.hat IOl is. I notc that no deck b depicleu on the ProPI;l:;l~L1
~truc...rurc. II is advise.ahle uH.:aretiJlly review building plans for the st.rm,:m/'c, If sliding dool's arc prop()st~d
for a future deck. the ap!llicanl should he ;lClvised that future I'equests for St~thal,:k variance to add a deck
will 1101 be viewed fl.'lvt>rahly by the DNR. Perhaps a condilion of any variancl~ could stipulate nu l~gress
doors arc allowed on the struclure c!bovc grutle.
ApDC~.l. Accessnrv St.n.cture on Twin Island (Lobi 62 and 64, Twin Isles). John andJ.inda Mcy~r
I l(lOkcd utlhis one and h~!ve no comment Oil this item.
If you have. any questions, p1ca.'ic call me ~ll 651-772-7917.
Sinc~J'c1y.
-- ''1
'\(;.\-.-\~t:.' -:L.~
Palri!.:k .1. Lynch III
DNR Area Hydrologist
DNR IlIfllrlllalj~lI1: (,;';1-2~6-6157 . I B8/{-(,4(1-6J67 . rTY: (1.~(..:!l)(I-'HX.1 . I XliI) (,;"l.J-W'7.~)
'\11 E'IlIallll'lllllllllllly ElllpIIlY,'(
Who \"..111I" I'i,....,ily
f'lllIl\o.l UII l.h:.~yL: h:III".II~~'1 (:IUI'~IIU1H.C .\
f\,'JUUUUIUI ,.f IlI'A. Pl,,~.l ('UJI:,UlmT \V:I;.1(C:
f.-
EXHIBIT F
..
l1f-~J~u--.._--.----.._- l[m rgt1 € cf{0I1-?-;'~ .
r ... ..... :-----
t;L ..~. A:v:ifJ. ~-.~. e~ - 5},;.", -~-~~.-
:i4Ltn..,~;~~~.-----
JJ.~........:. ~.-:' ~Y"~..~..'.'. .~~~ -4~.'J2'....'.....
&)iifJ~ a 7J~ ~~.. .. <.
- ... -'-~'-'--"~~""-'- ,'-- - .. ,'"-.-...------:..-
. ,J2i1~~-j;u~:".~~4 ~)>.%;i;,
! OC:.' am. .~~~n~:~-~$-. .-...u-~~i
. "-"PJD1~~n.O]:) ..;vt;:;..~n~ j1rZ~.-
~7Y--r~. ~~~.-..g ..- .u~
ro ~ .Y]~ ~. ~~--~ ~. ~.--Y-4~ ~--
~.~.....uCki:t~4~-#0-.--~~ho/:.M~. ....~-'..f..;"..;
v:~. d( .~ . ~-~;,:p.a1j~-~-
~...P . .'~ "~~JC~~~~ '~~r;
~-: .~-;t;i~, ~..:~~Il.~i7d. 7~-+'-;
. TJ '--4- . .u/P7a--nJ4~'~;.'!,..&>;-~;~~-
~. >>u;..... .'. . . . _.~.~..~..f:r/~-~.. ..--
,!j,.,.~.:Adc':<:" .. ~"~:':2 .}1~~
~~#'#(- '. .~t:!~~~g=~E
/1A~-~ .n' .-UL?d;~=-afJ~~-~_~r__d-@;*
~..--.'. _.~-~.--..~....-.-..n..~....n..~:.<.....-..:~.~.-u~...........n~..t...........~.
i ~...~...~...~--_................. .......r~-;;&--x
. .~:vk-~~- F----:~~-~_
11-.
:JII-.
~L ....~~-~-. . ..A-~..~....T".,-J;:
. u~.~. - f ..... ._~....~ .
..~ ..~ '
a (~~.~~~~ ___
y cS1~ y:?1Z e- ~ ~ 17: ~___ ·
,. ~~~~/~ ,-'-~~~-
.....'2u .. ..~..... .....~.n"2)k ." . . "_H ;::::l~,"~
i~. -.. ... .... . .. · ... ~_=c~." ...-~~ ~ "'=-_.-.~. ,
~~V?-J~~.: ....... ...~e-e!~~~_ .
~~=->;:J~~ .. .--zt:-~T
~. ~ fl-f..<!J7<-f-!, .. ~-b~ --;6 ~.. ..---c
m~~~. ~~~ ~....~
~._'........~~7::~~~~~L .
~~~~_.&~..~~--~--
~..-;;t;... -w. ~~~_=- ....,&~.....hAc..~.........
fk;::: c~~~-[f:~~..~ 6~::\
;tr;;--.~~~~~ ~n:..~!iE~:~i1)~~J.
\ .........~.. '. ....~--~,---~..:-'---~~ ~---_.-
~-- . ./.......:.-:-.~"._----~~ . -c....---~~~~4J~-~._-__
CU'Q- .1]-':: ...-.. .~-._-- --..---..-- . .... -------
._~----_. ~~-
..~--~:'_........_-
----_._-...._-._~"".'",."--_...,, ._.__.._-_._--~ ._----'.--.~..-,. ,- ...._------._~.,._-- ---.. -'-'_. .,- '-"--.- ""-
~~"'-"-'_""'-"-.., ._- - '- -. ,".-., -,"..----. _'". __..... "'_"'__'__.~_.'h'_"_,,, _,~ _."__.,,_ ,___,._,,,__,_
..u. 1;- J./
..D~ .:~ .s "ly'" , ..
Cl I ~P~4"'", 'IIt,'$
OSe 7;. 'H. e .'f/,J
P~fe4'7j L,.,,~
-------
--------
- - - - - - -- - - -!e>,
"I, ......,...... -~~--c~...."" .~~_
-----..- ,
I "" ",.".,,., _____
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
d
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J '2'., :::~8
~---'---;-
',,- ---- I
--
---
-,,~t ~S l~1[o 8~
------ 'O/)fElts
- ~ ::---..; ::---.::: ::::...:::-::;-.;::
?-::::- ?-::::- "::0 - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. --:---.: - - -
PRIOR LAKE
50.14 N80.05'14'"W
---~
---
-
LOT 34
G
I I
I I
I ,
I I
I I
, I
, J
j N
.. T
~ ,
I ,
, ,
1-,
e' IROH~ I
I I
,
I
I
~--
I ---':::::-.......
1/7.a.
....}
t)'...~' .I> i :"1
:.1,.,
,.,' . ~'.
.,.-
/
j
.,
'"
I'" I n-r
· LVI
IfJ./ I'
~
"""J
"--"-
--
,\-,
,.....
.
'"
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
4C
CONSIDER A ZONE CHANGE REQUEST BY
CENTEX HOMES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN
SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 115 NORTH, RANGE 22
WEST (Case File #01-001)
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
_X_ YES _NO-N/A
FEBRUARY 12, 2001
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
Centex Homes and John O'Loughlin have filed an application for a Zone Change for the
property located on the west side of CSAH 83, ~ mile south of CSAH 42, in the East ~
of the Northwest ~ of Section 28, Township 115 North, Range 22 West. The request is
to rezone the property from the A (Agricultural) District to the R-2 (Low to Medium
Density Residential) District, and to remove the Shoreland District designation from the
site.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Existin2 Use: This property is currently vacant land. There is a wetland located on the
northwest comer of the site. There is also a stand of trees located at the south end of the
site.
Adjacent Land Use, Zonin2 and Comprehensive Plan Desi2nation: The property to
the west and south is Shakopee Mdewakanton Trust Land. The land to the south is
developed with residences and businesses, while the land immediately to the west is a
wetland mitigation area. To the north ofthis property is vacant agricultural land, zoned A
(Agriculture) and planned for Hospitality General Business uses. To the east, across
CSAH 83, is The Wilds golf course and residential development, zoned PUD and planned
for Low to Medium Density Residential uses and Hospitality General Business uses.
Comprehensive Plan Desi2nation: This property is designated for Low to Medium
Density Residential uses on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The property
also meets the criteria for the extension of the MUSA.
1:\Olfiles\Olrezone\Ol-OOl\OI-OOlpc.doc Page I
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) /:1.47-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
.....~
Access: This property is accessed from CSAH 83. The access point is located across
from the entrance to The Wilds. It may also be possible to access this property from the
SMDC land to the south.
Utilities: Sewer and water services can be extended to serve this property from the
existing utilities located in Wilds Parkway and CSAH 83.
ANALYSIS:
This application includes two proposals. The first is a request to rezone the property from
the current A (Agricultural) district to the R-2 (Low to Medium Density Residential)
district. The second request is to remove the existing Shoreland designation from this
property.
A to R-2: Section 1108.600 of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the following policies for
amendments to the Official Zoning Map:
· The area, as presently zoned, is inconsistent with the policies and goals of the
Comprehensive Plan, or the land was originally zoned erroneously due to a technical
or administrative error, or
· The area for which rezoning is requested has changed or is changing to such a
degree that it is in the public interest to rezone so as to encourage redevelopment of
the area, or
· The permitted uses allowed within the proposed Use District will be appropriate on
the subject property and compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood.
The proposed R-2 district is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use
designation. The R-2 district allows residential development with densities up to 7.2
units per acre. This would allow townhouse development, as well as 6,000 square foot
single family residential lots.
The City Council recently adopted an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that
identified criteria to be considered when determining what Zoning District should be
applied to areas designated for Low to Medium Residential uses. These criteria are as
follows:
· The topography of the site.
· Capacity of utilities serving the site.
· Type and nature of abutting or nearby development.
· Type and quality of access to local, collector and arterial streets.
· Effect on traffic levels of service.
· Market conditions.
· Any costs incurred by the City as a result of the development.
· The degree to which significant natural features are preserved
1:\01 files\O 1 rezone\O 1-00 1 \0 1-00 1 pc.doc
Page 2
. Whether the proposed zoning supports the logical extension of existing'
neighborhoods.
. Whether the zoning district is delineated by logical natural or artificial boundaries.
. The impact on drainage patterns and co.nditions and the degree to which any adverse
impacts can be mitigated.
. Potential impacts on the physical condition of streets and roads serving the site.
The Planning Commission should identify any characteristic of this property that may not
meet these criteria.
Shoreland District: This property is located within 1,000 feet of Mystic Lake, and is
therefore located within the Shoreland District. Mystic Lake is classified as a Natural
Environment Lake; therefore, the minimum lot area lot width for a nonriparian single
family lot is 20,000 square feet and the minimum lot width is 100 feet.
The Shoreland District is generally defined as follows:
Land located within the following distances from protected waters: (1) 1,000 feet from the
Ordinary High Water Mark of a lake, pond, or flowage; and (2) 300 feet from a river or
stream, or the landward extent of a floodplain on such rivers or streams, whichever is
greater. The practical limits of shorelands may be less than the statutory limits where such
limits are designated by natural drainage divides at lesser distances, as shown on the
Official Zoning Map of the City.
Both this definition and Minnesota Rules allow the reduction of the Shoreland District if
the natural drainage area of the property is away from the water body. In this case, the
property lies outside of the Mystic Lake drainage area and drains to the northwest. The
view of this property, both to and from Mystic Lake, is also limited due to the elevation
of CSAH 83. Therefore, this property lies outside of the practical limits of the Mystic
Lake Shoreland District.
The DNR has also reviewed this request and has no objections. A letter from Pat Lynch,
Area Hydrologist for the DNR, is attached for your information.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the Zone Change as requested.
2. Recommend denial ofthe request.
3. Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning staff recommends Alternative #1. The proposed R-2 district is consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation. In addition, the property lies
outside ofthe practical limits of the Mystic Lake Shoreland District.
1:\01 files\O 1 rezone\O 1-00 1 \0 1-00 1 pc.doc
Page 3
ACTION REQUIRED:
The following motion is appropriate for this action:
1. A motion and second to recommend approval of the Zone Change from the A
(Agricultural) district to the R-2 (Low to Medium Density Residential) district and to
remove the described property from the Mystic Lake Shoreland District.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Applicants' Narrative
3. Letter from the DNR
4. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
5. Zoning Map
1:\01 files\O 1 rezone\O 1-00 1 \0 1-00 1 pc.doc
Page 4
Location Map
-L
-.
.l.;;. -:::::::lv..-
-- I ..\-\\...
'.. '1' ., D~'<- .'
I.. . . . \_. ~ \\:\ r-:-
.11.. -..., \\~t=
~
f---
'-----
~
-... --. -...
Properly f- i L r~
LbcaIia: ~ --..... .~~ -~lK": '-:\y~" '~ _
- '~ '<JJb."", - (
::<-.'~. - I
j~ __ k~'..~.. "---
/' I~':' ~~...s .
V U (/~
" .'. ~'":, ~ti..., -
, -- ~f '. ., - "'--- .......-
~. .: ~ ~ .....
"!~~~i':' ~_-~: ~~!
I~r+r. r-,~ t::.t~. ~";"'.':"'."",,?:-;.- ~
i~'-' bJ,..= ./ ~r;- ... ..._'<:...:.r..< :":::~:" - I
W. . J....; "'. . )'.:... '... ,
~]. J . r7l~ .: .:-.: ~ - . .
I' 1- . I .. L:~t .' . -7i~Lll:1.. .
...:-..:.t;= " r
.. j.....1
-f'
I ~ _ i _.. I (( i
~ IJ L ni?iL~~
I "1"- l~.:~/-
~
~W r--J~'
-~Jb
~ ( ~- ~~
~C~~ ~
~cJ ~~
L, ,~\
N
A
1000 0
I
1000 2000 Feet
I
.**~
* PIONEER
~ engineering
*~*if
Civil Engineers · Land Planners · Land Surveyors · Landscape Architects
December 11, 2000
Jane Kansier
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Re: Centex - O'laughlin Parcel
Prior Lake, Minnesota
P.E. # 1 00468
Dear Jane,
On behalf of our client, Centex Homes, I am requesting the removal of the Mystic Lake Shoreline
Overlay District for the above mentioned parcel. The parcel is approximately 40 acres located
immediately across from Wilds Parkway at County Road 83. Per our telephone conversation I
have attached a rezoning application and supporting documentation for your review.
The parcel falls within the 1000 foot Shoreland Overlay District for Mystic Lake (DNR 70-79W),
as measured from the ordinary high water mark of960.0. The shoreland ordinance is designed to
preserve the water quality and natural characteristics of the protected waters. The shoreland
ordinance states:
"The practical limits of shorelands may be less than the statutory limits
where limits are designated by natural drainage divides at less distances, "
This property lies completely outside of the existing watershed for Mystic Lake. I have attached a
copy of the City of Prior Lake, Stormwater Management Plan depicting the drainage boundary
for Mystic Lake following the centerline of the existing County Road 83. The property in question
drains completely to the north, through a series of wetlands and under County Road 42.
The second purpose of the ordinance, to preserve the natural characteristics of the protected
water, likewise is not impacted by the removal of the subject property from the Shoreland
District. The view from the shoreline (elevation 960.0) towards the property is through
approximately 100' of trees and underbrush, across the County Road 83 Right of Way (41-81
higher than the shoreline elevation), with the majority of the subject property significantly lower
than the shoreline. I have attached a cross section of the view from Mystic Lake towards the
subject property for your review.
As we discussed this request will need to be forwarded to Pat Lynch at the DNR for comments
2422 Enterprise Drive. Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120. (651) 681-1914. Fax 681-9488
625 Highway 10 N.E. · Blaine, Minnesota 55434 · (612) 783-1880 · Fax 783-1883
before the Planning Commision or City Council will act. I have taken the liberty of copying the,
DNR at this time and would appreciate the forwarding of the formal request to the DNR as soon
as possible.
If you have any questions or require any additional information please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
7J7;i;iA
Nicholas Polta
cc: Steve Ach, Centex Homes
Pat Lynch, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
.
\ '
I ;' I'.
. I .... a~'-' .
...... .' .~,..~'
- ~ . ..:-:-'\-
~ "j,".> . C~.~I
1" 1'- "l
~ '. - "' \.
--11) i <> \~r
i ~
~
. - _.~I . ~
-~___~t..:..::....J'-'--T--
__~ ----.i__ I , .1 l l
I
,
~!
I
e..-_
~
~
.-
I
\ ..:
'-'
::
1=1
0::'
>
()
I
I
~
m
()
a..
<:
~
"
Z
Z
o
N
~
w
~
<:
.....J
Q:
o
W-
~Q:
~a..
~
w
w
I
(/)
o
o
I
~
-
I
N
-
... '"
... GO
~f ~
,,~~ ~
~~ ~ ~ ~
...1.6. z.....1.&..
.;~:! ~~~
e.:~ ~~
,!J:_a:zl
a5~: i:2~
N,,- ~ G
~li~ ",.!iN
N::Ee ~ffiCO
I!!
:: ~
I ~
< w lI'
Go j::t
19R1 ? I
{Qb~ ! i
rnm~;~
rnm;~~
*ii-t1*
~ @:[i 1}
* Jyf. * {I
{t*l}
*i)lQJ{t
tl dJ c:::I )}
1;t *'~ 1;t
Ii II
hi~
i ': @Q)
II ~ ."
~ i >
~ :::
;;l ..
n ..
iil
Q) mOl 0;-1: Ni
~g:~ N!:;
~:z: _g-N
at I:.g: gpi;'
CjZ~ I:a:~
;ur< Ci~~
CD~- -~u;
0(..10 .. =G
;"':z ~~~
~ !" ~z~
~ !~
'" I -
I .....,
~ &0
~ 0
lD 0
< -
iii' lD
lD
0.
U>Cf)
~:J:
O~
:::0-;
s:-;
~~
)>
~
fTl-o
:::0:::0
s:O
)>:::0
Zr
)>)>
G)^
fTlfTl
s:
fTl
Z
~
-'
---0
~r
0)>
~Z
--
~
I'J
I
~
VI
I
o
o
11.-'=.-.--';::---" J",----,"" '\\ I J\ litl ~/,.., "/11/' f '> l-J /( I ....... t' ,.
/;//_ ~h i_.I .,',' '. ///! (r 'I . I \........ (-.J II ;)L
(~i. !~(""-;:::,:----r \) PT >>1) \',' 'iIJii ',~.~ =-~///} '(j )'. 'I o~.' ~ \ ~~
iiI"~ ! 1 '--- r '( (r:) '~(/ i r~.Q. (~
Jjll ~~/~r\\ "-') ((r? J('(~ "'___/ j l J' l./ (. t - (r\1
!:Hl~~Oi 1~ \"-'~"I {II/;'; 1 'I S-' . \~, \ (~.~" '\ ') qj ;\i
~'.) ffi, I ) \ ,.-...-~ i31 IJI .' h.. ,,-..... ~ I ~L;f1 \' I
~ U ~lli \ ~/ I~,\ \ J:; t'--.'-" ......j \....'III>.{ ~ '<
~1'\~/,((1 /. ':\\l\'!\r~:i.\~l~~~~,-~,-:
~\H{ '-J' ~ ~~!"~~\c::' ~~.~ ~ ~z f-'
) ~ \ . I" J ----...: tI'~<:..~~ ~ ~ \ "-T /./'-ffi i -n p.'
_[<!~~ 1 r ~ \.'--? -- .) ~ ._ ,~~~~ W r--.
J~d/')/\i Ii \ '~\ ~ f'. ~~. ~~~. V--
'1 /1 J' ,,\ ; :'?: ~ \ I '--- 'I:
~iJi ...~ ) /"'1 jS~~ i"_ -~ I '~~ J
~)G-::9~ ,< \ . ~~~) ~;!3: ~~. - .~"'~~~
~ \ I r":J D' . ': ~:sia J '(~'r/j'X) ~
__ ) ('., ~~ ,~",' ~~-../~~J V? .) ^~~.
'11\l" - .
'1 co --'f 1~".t..,~ \ I ,t';,:."1i :II' \\\)"'-7 (
~ r- s: ...- V'~!' ~\ :~:;~ \~; II ~l...:..J J 11 \
-., ~~ I'"'l..~'''';~'' """~tlt~1 (~ $/ it
..... \ CD :::!: In \)~~( ~ 2-.: -...:.:: / - :>., .--..' 1/ '> \1} \
) . \)' () - \) ': ~,,'~ ~i "~'"' r: G ~~~
r C7 ~ n< I ~,~. I)]' ~ --I \ 'i: I!e . .,
'J n '-,::.., ~ j1;:!" r )-;\2 ~ I f)\J ~I \ I { (f \ v; ~
U Jj', ",-)\A l\fJ~ /4 ~ \ :, d' (\ V51.f":
~W\f( .. <n-L~ ~~~,~~ ~.'\~ -" ~~I1( .~(;-?,
If y .. \A. ~ l":h-... ~1 ..;c'<J '\ i~ ' ~,! ( r-:; . ~J),J
fj ;;:{"~/ r.~ st~~~~~~V>J<>I~ dJ,~~~-'-'"~~" N,..~ ~~ L~'(
< ,"'\' ~.t/.I 'I ~- dF 'J' 'v -~. "?I.. <in
;..,.... v... ..... ' - . \" ~:/. .::.-- ,,'~,1 / J.' 'S 1\'':: c:::2. ~\ 0
~......"';?- \- .c:~-:'-;. Cf'''~ ~~r~~.. ' ;f,n~i / ~ ~ ~ ).-'1 i \(c ,I U.~ ~~
~ I ~d v /I ,~~ I ~ ~ ,. VI / I ~ .,~. '?... r....
'--- 'I'~-'\ loll! '~"--"j~~! :8....> f I ~ ~'l ~
-('.~~.~ f. f ';:J j~&9,/' () I 1/&) i::~~ l' I ffq '\l(T
\~" ~-1Jr A"~ ~~#;...~< J c; ;', ^(;~I) \jjlJI1iL~:1
r1 r ~~. ~~ ~c. .,~} -'"\ V '....... I \ {~I ~ {j "\'.
~ '''J~ ~~ <...)(~~ ~ ' /;:.,Jrl~~:--;::: J' '-~ ~; V ~...... ~
_ _--.:; ... /~,' ~.z;.~ _, ~"'I....:"\ (I '
I ~ ' .. '.V- jj;; , 1;:.,.....-- ""';."... i /~...i?'lF=-~ ,'on '- ~c.n: I ~ / /(": 'L-
~-(;~~~J~.t;-:~' ~.~~ ~\...':>\ 0f1AN(.,-::;,~~r-z~~~:"~~' ~ .//... // iGt.-jj
.J \ ....,yt ,j") ~" i<j.;?t/. ,..:. :.:.::/\1\ -'~J "'0 .. f '\ G $': :;...- ~.. ' I I I.:..-{""/ ~
...-- '~ \ '~, I ~\~ ' ,.' ~ ~-....... I . => I J J! ~ -::-~
...::.J: V:'",,, '- , ~~2/j/:LfL" 'l .' ~_...::: '"--"It ~ ! ~ '/~,.H
~J )r^i~::" .:'?!' ~- '~J f ,~~:.. J;;r,.~/- ~ r;;z1 ir ~~
~~~/ \ '~)-)~ ,---==~. ..~~~\\~-:::,' ~.s...~. L r~~ I r' ~
-0 ,. r-~ / ~... ~~l \ q. "1 \~...:--"'...... I. L--'. ,--~ "-- ,
I /./.,/ ~ In ' ! . ,! . -....c.. I \
01 ,.fJ~t1 ~" ClO N,' ). " ,. ~"':-; .- : 0 '
:llIr. ..._' . ,~,.v ClO g;::s:.; ~-_. ... U l., .. :,~::::::t · 'lil ".--- 11.,.. fJ!
~J:
,I:
~
IIi
iiJ
III
.il
Ii:
II
n
U
II
---
,
B
i!
~
IiJ
...
"lJ
~
I
e
~
:r
i
lil
C)-t
.., 0
0....
fII 0
fII -
o~
(1) (1)
::l 0
fII ..
;:;:
';<;t-I
Cl
!--lie
NO
c: ~
::l (1)
;:;:cn
fII
'"
o
n
..,
(1)
I
I~
B I
.
i
JDI!ID ::;;z:: D.
"U-t-t-t-t-t
000000
.., ,..~,...-,...
,.. 9.. 9.. 9.. !Ut
~ "U ~ "U !!!. ....0
(1) 0 (I) 0 ::l '"
o ~~~'2.:i
30g CD:r
:ra;o.~O~
;~~g3(1)
(I)" -.
:l! 0 -<"c:
CD _" ::J
~p ::::~;:
gN~O!'!"
o.Ot-ln
n . 01
O. 0 OlUl
~ r 0
"1J
o
::l
!;
Ul
=l
IT!
o
>
-t
~
o
~
~
Z
"lJ
~
~
~
!iiiil
I @
!iiiil
UI =
a ~
[iiiiJ
~
~
Cl
o
n
B
I
:i.
lIB.
.~
./
~Ii
iiJ
fll
_il
1.1
J.
II
fi
I!
II
!
E
~
~
o
."
'"
~
F;;
I[ ~
S · 6
. z
i . ~
I
n
~
~
::
o
;c:
....
'"
I
o
~
c:
<>
::
c:
z
."
~
n
J!I
I
!
:. :.,
~l:
: 11
.:. ,.1
; ~ I
II!
. ..
.i~ ~.
"!"
~
c
, .
Tr
.~
~[.,.,.~
.. .
'!o -:.
.. .
: 1:1
: fl1
I;
". ml.u
uu~n
I
~
l)
I,
.. \:~
=-~=l
~ -I
~I
~I
~
II
I
,
. \t
\ : t
01' -
\t
i)
:::... II' ,
~ 9- . /) :. ':1
It t ~,t I ~
( J t /1..........., tit
" ,,& ,-I
. ".......,..". I --
-.-.
-'-0_._ l
I I
! ~
;~
.
I
~ ~ - 1'1
I.
Is
:::... I'
- -:.-t,,-_- - -.!'s;==- .:j)
Q
~!
Sf
..
IS
.
I "I
; II
III
~I
I
I
J
s
I
I
u:p
rill
~I
I
......
---
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
f
.
I
.
S
.
I
.
S
-
J?
~
~-
~-
...> -
.........~...-.
-
;(
,.
IS
I(
I
.
~---:. -
It
It
.......=4....-.-
--....
tm'_~
c o. . D. . S (ImITIC wa: DIlIYI)
J II !IIIIJIII
r ~I Iff ii'!1 ! H}!II! 'i fll{
mil t ~t I II&; . ;[ >
II . I g I It,bi li ! !II
fl w..,.~.~ ~& ~
t I~ I i · '.(1 f i~
t u~
I i I I lilli' J ~. >
I Illi.l! , ;;["""'-
rar~ ! I J i i z"
...!t I I i'ljjll I )1 >
~h; I I t I .. rJ 1 J I ,.P CJ)
&J I t I I JIUU . Un
~: ' L
iU~ Ii I~ :~ .. tl!. ~
~-~ 1 H ", I I l~
l~ ill f~ - il! 'Ii! I J rz
f' ~ I - i~11! W i I r~ CJ)
~. c:
I ~ 'rr~~I i! -
I
Wi j_ ~ I z= .
1~~1 i J ~t ~
loll 'i n li~ ~~ <:
!- III Ii III · I htJ::l
ell - 0 f h><
> . _ , Ii i II
:;; . I f
tll
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793
Telephone: (651) 772-7910 Fax: (651) 772-7977
January 22,2001
Jane Kansier
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Centex Homes Rezoning Request, 38.9 Acres, Mystic Lake (#70-79W) Shoreland District
Dear Mrs. Kansier:
I am in receipt of the rezoning proposal submitted on behalf of Centex Homes Development.
Based on my review of the exhibits submitted (zoning map, stormwater management plan,
topography, etc.), the DNR does not object to the removal of the O'Laughlin parcel from the
Mystic Lake Shoreland Overlay District. Runoff will generally flow towards.the northwestern
portion of the site, away from the shoreland basin.' In addition, if the berm and plantings along
County Road 83 as depicted on the plan and profile sheet dated December 15,2000, are
implemented, the visual impacts of the proposed development will be minimized.
Please note a portion of DNR wetland 70-158W is in the northwest corner of the site. This is the
direction of drainage from the majority of the site. Any stormwater routed through this wetland
should be treated first. The DNR basin should not be used for primary stormwater treatment.
Any work below the Ordinary High Water Level of this wetland may require a DNR protected
waters permit from this office.
If you have any questions regarding DNR's position on this zoning matter, please call me at 651-
772-7917.
Sincerely,
~
Patrick J. Lynch
Area Hydrologist
I@;::JO '0\:;< fc:~~ ". !
l\fu~ 121\/'lsl:".
I I ~ L:_ - _.J .' - I' ' .,
! \ I -, i "
I '.1
l), I j: I !:
~( I 24 2001 ,:, i I
'\':'\ I JAN :;1::.
I \ I ,I, I,
, Ill; II
\ \ I ' ,. : J
uL IV'
Steve Horsman, City Zoning Administrator
. Bud Osmundson, City Public Works Director
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 . 1-888-646-6367 . ITY: 651-296-5484 . 1-800-657-3929
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Who Values Diversity
Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
Minimum of 10% Post-Consumer Waste
CRITERIA FOR EXTENSION OF MUSA
In order to insure that development which is proposed does not strain City
resources, the City will apply the following criteria in judging whether a proposed
development is eligible to have sanitary sewer services extended.
. Property shall be contiguous to property already within the MUSA.
. MUSA designation shall only be given to developments having a recorded final
plat and a signed developers agreement with surety covering necessary
infrastructure improvements to be installed as part of the development.
. Where applicable, utility improvements will address health, safety and
environmental issues and concerns.
. The development will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
. The development will provide adequate water supplies.
. The development will provide adequate roads and streets to serve the
development.
. The development will provide for adequate sanitary sewer facilities.
. The development will proceed consistent with applicable environmental policies
and regulations.
. The developer and benefiting property owners shall assume the primary
responsibility for financing improvement costs. The City will participate in
such financing only under extraordinary circumstances.
. Preliminary plan approval shall not constitute a guarantee that a MUSA
allocation will be made to the subject property.
. The development shall proceed under the understanding that the project will be
maintained in accordance with the limitations imposed by the City and the
Metropolitan Council regarding MUSA availability and potential sewage flows
from the project. The City and Metropolitan Council shall be indemnified by
the developer against any claims arising as a result of future limitations on
MUSA availability.
. The City agrees to annually report on all allocations of undesignated MUSA
reserve to the Metropolitan Council.
1:\comp2020\musacrit.doc
~ (]) c:
", U) ro
"U) :J a..
c:u
(]) c:
~~
a.
E
8
~
~
~
o
--
~
a..
'0
~
o
'"
z.~
G ~~ I/) 8
m ~ 'il -E"c ~ 6 0
::> ~ ~ ~~ "~ ~ ~ i N
-g E~ "~~8 ~~!i ~(J)' ~
co ::J "-I/) C ~~ c 0. lQ 15 !E!
-.J 6 "-c l ClCl Q) Q) C"C !!I i
i ~~~~ ~"8."8.Qj~@ I~ ~O/:I>-
~ JHt ! nn~ j H~ 8 ~
!IH~ '5 ~iH~ ~~ !~H~ i
J 0011 ;lilllll i I ~ 1011
~
~
l-
e
--
I-
e...
'0
~
.......
o
C)
co.
-c co
~~
Iii
~ :m Iii
~ m ~ m '0
'13 ~ ~ :2! ~ i jg
0:: ~ ~ i!S Ul
C~'iiiO::'- ~laY.!-
OifJCD~l!l 'iii~as'~
:iIl 0:: 0:: . Ul 0:: >! dl ,- C ~ 1ii
~if~~f!~~~~~ ~i
~~~~5~.8~~~i1ij -g C
t~~~~~f81~~~ ~ ~
I 8~ &.l~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '& 0 3 3 ~ 0 ~.~ ~ ~
IDD~II~IIIIIIDD~~
~
z*oo
~
'"
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
'::
PLANNING REPORT
4D
CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF THE ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO NOT PERMIT
CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE
ON TWIN ISLES, Case File #01-004
LOTS 62 AND 64, TWIN ISLES
STEVEN HORSMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
_X_ YES NO
FEBRUARY 12, 2001
The Planning Department received an appeal notice from Attorney Bryce D.
Huemoeller (Applicant), representing John & Linda Meyer (Owners). The appeal
regards the Planning Departments decision to not permit construction of an
accessory structure on two vacant lots on "Twin Isles" (Exhibit A, Notice of
Appeal). The applicant's request to allow the construction was submitted to the
City in a letter dated December 15, 2000 (Exhibit B, Applicant Request). On
December 28, 2000, staff responded and denied the request with an explanation
and the option to appeal the decision (Exhibit C, City Response).
This case originated from a complaint in September 1999, regarding the
construction of an accessory building on two vacant lots on "Twin Isles",
specifically Lots 62 and 64. Upon inspection, staff determined the construction
had commenced without the necessary building permits. The property owner
was notified of the violation and halted construction. The owner's first option was
to apply for a building permit to construct a seasonal cabin on the vacant lots
because accessory structures are not permitted.
On September 18, 2000, the City adopted Ordinance Amendment 00-22 that
permits accessory structures on two or more nonconforming lots under single
ownership that are separated by a private road or driveway from the lot
containing the principal structure. The owner is now proposing to combine lots
62 and 64, with Lots 43, 44, and 45, which contain the principal structure, and
complete construction of the accessory building.
L:\01fi1es\01appeal\01-004\ApIRpt01-004.DOC Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
...
\~
DISCUSSION:
Lots 43, 44, 45,62 and 64, "Twin Isles", were platted in September of 1925
(Exhibit D, Survey). They are nonconforming lots of record, substandard in
dimensions and area. Lots 43, 44 and 45, contain the existing seasonal cabin
(principal structure), and Lots 62 and 64, contain an existing shed (accessory
structure), and a partial slab for the proposed 2nd accessory structure. The plat
for "Twin Isles" provides for a 20-foot wide private driveway dedicated for the use
of the respective property owners. This driveway divides lots 43, 44 and 45,
from Lots 62 and 64 (Exhibit E, Twin Isles).
In the applicant's request (Exhibit B), they referenced the City Code in defense
of their interpretation. The request states in part, "Based upon the amendment
to Section 1101.501 of the City Code, we believe the Meyers are entitled to
combine their five platted lots into one parcel and build the accessory structure
on Lots 62 and 64". In addition, the request refers to the island development,
and states in part, "The plain language of the island development ordinance
speaks in terms of permitted uses, rather than structures", and further states in
part, "The ordinance does not suggest in any way that structures on private lots
are limited strictly to cabins; in fact it explicitly contemplates accessory
structures, in Section 1104.309(8)", end of quote.
The amended Ordinance Subsection 1101.501: Lot Provisions: (3,d), follows
and is a part of Ordinance Section 1101.500: General Provisions. However,
Ordinance Subsection 1104.309 Island Development is defined as a special
provision, with specific limited conditions for island development, under Section
1104.300: Zoning Provisions (Shoreland Regulations). The Code provides
for interpretation of individual ordinances when Qeneral provisions conflict with
special provisions. City Code Section 1101.300 Rules of Construction:
1101.308 Conflicts, states in part, "the two shall be construed if possible so that
effect shall be given to both. If the conflict between the two provisions is
irreconcilable, the special provisions shall prevail and shall be construed as an
exception to the general provision unless the general provision was enacted
subsequent to the special provision and it shall be the manifest intention of the
City Council that such general provisions shall prevail':
In regards to the applicants reference to permitted uses, in all zoning districts
specific "uses" are listed. I n the R-1 District, Subsection 1102.404: Accessory
Uses: a detached private garage is a listed permitted use. Also, Subsection
1102.800: Residential Performance Standards: (8) "Accessory Structures" are
a listed permitted use. Therefore, because accessory structures are considered
a "Use", and the fact that accessory uses are not a listed permitted use is evident
in Subsection 1104.309: Island Development.
L:\01 files\01 appeal\01-004\ApIRpt01-004.DOC
Page 2
\,:,
Finally, the applicant refers to Subsection 1104.309: Island Development: (8), ,
that states in part, "any construction project shall require a restoration plan to be
submitted and reviewed by the City to ensure that natural vegetation is retained
insofar as possible to screen seasonal structures and other buildinqs on site".
The stated reference to other buildinQs'on site is explained in condition (1) of the
same subsection 1104.309, and states in part, Recreational facilities, such as a
pavilion or picnic facilities for a homeowners' association, may also be permitted
by conditional use permit, end quote. In the definition for a pavilion, the terms
structure and buildinQ are included.
As proposed on the survey, the accessory structure's dimension of 24 ' by 24'
feet totals 576 square feet. The applicant did not submit building plans or
impervious surface area calculations prior to completion of this report. Staff
estimates the total area for Lots 62 and 64 to be approximately 8,000 square
feet, and Lots 43, 44 and 45 to be approximately 14,000 square feet in area.
This appeal request was referred to the Department of Natural Resources. They
responded with "no comment".
The following Exhibits are included references for this report :
A) Notice of Appeal; B) Applicant Request; C) City Response; D) Survey; E)
Twin Isles Plat.
RECOMMENDATION:
An appeal to the decision of the Zoning Administrator is not site specific and
affects the way in which the ordinance is applied in all situations. In summary,
the listed permitted "Uses" for accessory structures in the Qeneral provisions
code section are not listed permitted "Uses" in the special provisions code
section for island development. In addition, the City staff's long-standing policy
has been to interpret the ordinance as not permitting accessory structures on
'Twin Isles". The staff therefore recommends the Planning Commission uphold
the decision of the Zoning Administrator and deny the appeal as requested.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the appeal as to staff's interpretation of the City Code, as requested
by the applicant, or approve an interpretation of the Code the Planning
Commission deems appropriate under the circumstances. In this case, the
Planning Commission should direct staff to prepare a Resolution with findings
approving the request.
2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose.
L:\01 files\01 appeal\01-004\ApIRpt01-004.DOC
Page 3
3. Deny the Appeal request because the Planning Commission finds a lack of
demonstrated support for the applicant's interpretation of the Zoning Code.
ACTION REQUIRED:
The Planning staff recommends Alternative #3.
Motion and second adopting Resolution 01-004PC, denying an Appeal of the
Zoning Administrator's decision to not permit an accessory structure to be
permitted on island development.
L:\01 files\01 appeal\01-004\ApIRpt01-004.DOC
Page 4
':"
RESOLUTION Ol-04PC
A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO NOT PERMIT AN ACCESSORY
STRUCTURE FOR ISLAND DEVELOPMENT
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Bryce D. Huemoeller, representing John & Linda Meyer, has filed an Appeal from the
Zoning Administrator's decision to not permit an accessory structure to be
constructed on "Twin Isles" property located in the R-l (Low Density Residential)
District and the SD (Shoreland) District at the following location, to wit;
Legally described as Lots 62 and 64, "Twin Isles", Scott County, MN
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the request for an Appeal as contained in Case
#01-004PC and held hearings thereon on February 12,2001.
3. The Board of Adjustment has considered the Zoning Administrator's interpretation
and decision regarding the general provision code for accessory structures on platted
lots of record and the specific provision code for island development that does not
permit accessory structures and the effect of the proposed Appeal on the Zoning
Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
4. The Shoreland District and specifically island development provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance are special provisions that are applied over and above the general
provisions of the ordinance.
5. Section 1101.308 of the Zoning Ordinance specifically states when general provisions
conflict with special provisions of the ordinance, the special provisions shall prevail.
6. The appellant has not demonstrated reasonable or factual support to justify his
interpretation ofthe ordinance provisions.
7. The contents of Planning Case #00-004PC are hereby entered into and made a part of
the public record and the record of decision for this case.
1:\01 files\O 1 appea1\0 1-004\denyres.doc 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby denies the
following applicants Appeal from the Zoning Administrator's decision to not allow
construction of an accessory structure on -islaiid development (as shown in Exhibit D,
Survey);
1. To permit the construction of an accessory structure on platted lots described as
"Twin Isles".
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on February 12,2001.
Thomas E. V oOOof, Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
1:\01 files\O 1 appeal\O 1-004\denyres.doc
2
EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF APPEAL
~i .MN 5 2OOl"'i '1
HUEMOELLER & BATES
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
P.O. BOX 67
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
iii i j!
Jil ; it
li!J ij
IV
JAMES D. BATES
BRYCE D. HUEMOELLER
January 5, 2001
Telephone (952) 447-2131
Fax (952) 447-5628
City of Prior Lake Board of Adjustment
c/o Planning Department
Mr. Steven Horsman, Zoning Administrator
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, 1v1N 55372
RE: John and Linda Meyer
Accessory structure on Twin Island
NOTICE OF APPEAL
TO THE BOARD OF ADmSTMENT:
This letter is intended to serve as a Notice of Appeal pursuant to Ordinance 1109.3 01,
of the attached decision of the Zoning Administrator, which was received in this'office on
January 4,2000. The ground of the appeal is that the Zoning Administrator has-incorrectly
interpreted Ordinance Section 1104.309 to prohibit accessory structures on island lots, for
reasons set forth in the attached submission by this office dated December 15,2000.
The appellants request that a hearing be held on this appeal between 10 and 45 days
from your receipt of this notice, as provided in the ordinances. If anything further is required
in order to process this appeal, please contact this office.
Sincerely yours,
(' n
'~~1l\~
Bryce D. Huemoeller
BDH:bj
Enclosures
cc: John and Linda Meyer
EXHIBIT B APPLICANT REQUEST ~
------- 'I '.. '.'
~ . : . ! !; ~
HUEMOELLER & BATES . ': 'd!1i
ATTORNEYS AT LAW DEG 18 2(DJ Iii I::
16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL i: u' I Ill)) I
P.O. BOX 67 ~ . IL/
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
JAMES D. BATES
BRYCE D. HUEMOELLER
December 15, 2000
Telephone (952) 447-2131
Fax (952) 447-5628
Mr. Steve Horsman
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, :MN 55372
RE: John and Linda Meyer
Accessory structure on Twin Island
Dear Mr. Horsman:
We are working with John and Linda Meyer, who own several lots in the plat of Twin
Isles, specifically Lots 43, 44 and 45, on which they have a cabin, and Lots 62 and 64, on
which they wish to build a 24 foot square accessory building. Lots 62 and 64 are separated
from the main lots by a private driveway dedicated in the plat of Twin Isles.
Based upon the amendment to Section 1101.501 of the City Code, passed by the City
Council on September 18, 2000, we believe the Meyers are entitled to combine their five
platted lots into one parcel and build the accessory structure on Lots 62 and 64, as shown on
the attached plat and survey copies. However, an objection has been raised on the contention
that Code Section 1104.309, dealing with island development, prohibits accessory structures
on island lots. We do not agree, for the following reasons.
New Code Section 1101.501 states that a detached accessory structure may be built
on the portion of a lot which is separated from the principal structure by a private driveway,
if the Plamling Commission determines, after a public hearing, that "the design and location
of the accessory structure are compatible with the surrounding properties in terms of
architecture, building materials and placement on the lot." This provision is effective for lots
in R-I residential districts, which would include the plat of Twin Isles.
However, we have been directed to Code Section 1104.309, which states in part:
1104.309
Island Development: Development on islands without municipal sewer
and water shall be subject to the following conditions:
(1) Permitted uses on islands are limited to seasonal cabins, public parks and open
space. Year-round residences are not permitted. Recreational facilities, such
as a pavilion or picnic facilities for a homeowners' association, may also be
permitted by conditional use permit as set forth in subsection 1108.200.
Mr. Steve Horsman
December 15, 2000
Page 2
We see no reason why this ordinance should prevent a landowner from receiving the benefit
of the new ordin~ce on accessory structures. The ordinance must, according to long-
standing principles oflaw, be construed as a whole (1) according to the plain and ordinary
meaning of its terms, (2) strictly against any restriction of the owners' right to use their
property, and (3) in light of the ordinance's underlying policy goals.
The plain language of the island development ordinance speaks in terms of permitted
uses, rather than structures. Section 1101.400 of the City Code defines the term "use" as "the
purpose or activity for which a premises is designed, arranged or intended for which it is or
may be occupied or maintained." The ordinance does not suggest in any way that structures
on private lots are limited strictly to cabins; in fact it explicitly contemplates accessory
structures, in Section 1104.309(8):
(8) Any removal of vegetation in conjunction with any construction project
shall require a restoration plan to be submitted and reviewed by the City
to ensure that natural vegetation is retained insofar as possible to screen
seasonal structures and other buildings on site.
The island development ordinance itself, then, contemplates a seasonal cabin and an
accessory structure for storage, such as a garage, on an island lot.
Construction of structures accessory to use of a lot for a seasonal cabin is consistent
with the evident policy of the ordinance to limit the use of island lots to a seasonal basis.
There is no policy basis or other justification for attempting to read in a prohibition on
accessory structures, and we request that Meyers be allowed to submit their application for
building permit so that the Planning Commission may consider it in the manner contemplated
by Section 1101.501.
Bryce D. Huemoeller
BDH:bj
Enclosures
cc: John and Linda Meyer
.
EXHIBIT C CITY RESPONSE
December 28, 2000
Huemoeller & Bates
Attorneys At Law
Bryce Huemoeller
16670 Franklin Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: City staff's response to Accessory Structures on Twin Island
Dear Mr. Huemoeller:
The City of Prior Lake received your correspondence and interpretation of the recent
adoption of Ordinance Subsection 1101.501: Lot Provisions: (3,d), as it relates to the
Meyer's Twin Island- properties, and their desire to complete construction of an
accessory structure on Lots 62 and 64, which are separated by a private driveway from
Lots 43, 44 and 45, the site of an existing cabin.
In all zoning districts "Accessory Uses" are listed, and in the R1 District this includes
Subsection 1102.404: (which states in part) A detached private garage not to exceed
832 square feet. However, accessory structures are considered a "Use", and the fact
that accessory uses are not permitted, is evident in Subsection 1104.309: Island
Development.
The island development subsection is a special limiting case within the City Ordinance,
with specific permitted uses identified. The city staff's long-standing practice has been to
interpret the ordinance as not permitting accessory uses or accessory structures on
island development.
If you should have any questions regarding this matter or you wish to appeal the staff's
decision to the Board of Adjustment, call my direct phone number at 447-9854 between
8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, and I will assist you. Enclosed is a
copy of Subsection 1109.301: Right to Appeal from the Decision of the Zoning
Administrator.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
/. ""'-
St en Horsman
Zoning Administratorllnspector
16200 ~~eek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY E:vIPLOYER
SURVEY PREPARED FOR:
'JOHN MEYER
8300 EWING ROAD
BLOOMINGTON, MN. 55431
Valley Surveying CO., I? A.
SUITE 120-C, 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (6/2) 447 - 2570
EXHIBIT D SURVEY
_-7-
!() _I
\ \
\l
~ <'0 "'r ~ ....
./ D-?/v,
./ Well", l:Ift/l~
I"; of ~r
y .V~
~
DESCRIPTION:
933.4
911.1
I
I
J
I
w
=
~
0
V
0
't N
.0 Z
III
'"
<D
..
2
...
0
..
.5
~
~
I
8
iii
,...
ISO"'U
)
\
\
\
\
z:r" LlHOlN
o
t,:-Dt
,)
I
\
1
~
,
8.
III
.0
.
t-
N
N
<:t
CD
I{)
V
-
(]l ~
<:t ~
10 ?:
N W
o
\D
Z
<t
.0
III
\ .')0.'1 N
.0
..
2
,
,
CD
~
,
r '4" LINDEN
..t~,,,, 0
14" LINDEN
o
,
,
I
..
_0
Il{:,\'HD(N% ~
(J\
~ <to
~iD
,
\
.~o.;.Q
TWIN IS". 20"
1.I~
zo" ~tN
.." LINDtN
o
Ll-3 .
" ,.,
,~ (.:
Lots 62 and 64, "TWIN ISLES", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing the location
ofthe proposed building as of this 29th day of June, 2000.
NOTES: Benclunark Elevation 932.25 Top of concrete slab on lot 64.
931.7 Denotes existing grade elevation
x
(931.5) Denotes pr~posed finished grade elevation
-+ Denotes proposed direction of finished surface drainage
m
X
::I:
-
-0 -0 OJ
-
-I
m
-I
~
-
z
-
en
.-
m
en
=-"'-
:>
~~
S'\ I "
~ ~~ ,.
J,
.......,
(
.'
.
,
..----
~.
-......
r..... , ~
..' (
....... \
,
I
I'
I
J
.
~
I
P'
.
':
t.. -".--'"t'-'" ;,;;.... .
11
~ 3V ~
· r~f i l~ J~ ~~p t: f~
l~~
[il ,," ~ ~h- ! l ~~
,,. ~ ....... !'"' ~ l "ll,
n~ tlf \i'S> ~[ It'''~ ~ .....lI'~
"to :Y [ I ~ ~ \1
~~~ -J :ir'~ "" H ~
t;t II itl::..l:::. ~
~ ,~ t~' t l~~ II
1 -<:- ..-'1\ l
\1 Co ~~lol~ . !~
.~ Ill,~ ! i"t
t u~
......~ llit~l ~l,
~ H( ~ ~ "" tl~
. . ~r OJ ;~~~ .. ~~ ~
'i \\' , ~g rt>~ ~ t !d
ltt: ~ Ii t~ ;;l;tt'l CJ i .., ~
:;~~t g ~ ~:.
l.r
;3~ ~." ~ - f'- ~ ...
~ ;:0 ~'( t. ~.i" S _ l. ii'
,[ ~ r ~ ''''$}t ~ t ~l~
" t ll~~
di ~ ~~~ flr~ :::1
~~ l~~ :!I
~s ~~ ~
'l~ Us ,;:
~I'l' ~ h oti\
. "i!~_ ."
~ '!. l.A [ f rC'l ~~-r . ~
-i'~ " ~ .l:l ~ .
. I h. .il , . 'tt ~~ & 1
l'" :ai li~
I. ~ J' ~ ~ r I' tt
"! '0 T 0 f ii ."
- .~ . . u f ~ t ./
. .{
~ . ('
:j
EXHIBIT F
January 22, 2001
IT'~:~ ;~;' ~: c:~; r]-
i: : ! 1 ,'.::::J .---.-----.-.-.
'\ \/.( I' .MN 2. 3 2001
U'~..
o
Mr. Steve Horsman
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: John and Linda Meyer
Accessory structure on Twin Isles
Dear Mr. Horsman;
Per your request, I have enclosed the following to be included in the minutes sent to the City of Prior Lake
Planning Commissioners:
1. Copy of the lot layout of Twin Isles showing the sixty-four (64) lots, including 12 interior lots.
2. A revised survey by Valley Surveying Company indicating actual lot area, all setbacks and impervious
surface for our accessory structure. The attached survey includes the required tree inventory. Mr. Dave
Ryan from Valley Surveying worked directly with you to be sure we provided the City with everything
needed to meet the requirements.
3. Copy of both the "Existing" and "Proposed" Impervious Surface Calculations completed by Valley
Surveying Company. .
4. Flood Protection requirements are met.
5. The private 20" driveway is platted between our interior lots 62/64 to the common waterfront.
6. Copy ofthe design of the accessory structure to be used as a detached garage for a vehicle and storage.
7. Copy of our 9/10/99 dated request with Scott County combining all our parcels into one (1) parcel.
My wife and I own lots 43, 44, 45, 62 and 64.
Our septic system and gray water are located on lot 43.
Our primary seasonal cabin dwelling is on lot 44.
Our well is located on lot 45.
Directly behind these lots is a plotted 20-foot driveway.
On the other side ofthe driveway are our interior lots 62 and 64.
If needed, I can be reached at (952) 835-5929 or (952) 440-6770 or my cell
number (612) 396-6817.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
J.Lt1I~~
John M. Meyer
8300 Ewing Road
Bloomington, MN 55431-1034
. .
.. ..... ..' .... .....:.CITy.OF~RIOR.LAKE..
',: ~*iS*icli;;. . ImperviousSurfacc Calculations. '.,
.. '. (To be Submitted with Building Perm.it Application) :.,
. :. 'For All Properties Located in the .ShorelandDistrict (SD).
'. The N!aximum Imper/iou~ Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent. . .
Property Address \-:.o\s . .Co"L i~q---r \.J...)'I~"Is LES .
. . '"....
Lot Area '.'52.00' . Sq. Feet.=< 30% = .............. 2.'-\ ~O:
*~**************************~*******************.**********.*********....
LENGTH
\vlDTH
SQ. FEET
HOUSE
x
A IT ACHEDGAR.s.\.GE
x
x.
=
TOTAL PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE......................
DETACI-IED BLDGS'
",...l
Le~ ~"2-
\ \ .... t G
\/1.0
;~
TOTAL DETACHED B1JILDTh-GS.......................
\I\.e
DPJ-\i~\VA -[I? A VEDj-\.....'ZEAS
v
.,
=
(Driveway-paved or not)
x
=
('.ld..."".l',...Parl'~n~ Ar""" I .. \ I' =. L1 U
'.~ 'w_':..,- '''''''';:'' ."-"1 . . -z. .\ "'2.. l, .\
c..O~\L $ (ttb ?;) \
N el..-u ,t) 1-0(' ",,;;~..rT 0 T 'P 'L-ED ,n r.. ~
f T.-\.L .a.. ....\ y f ..~...~.::,.................,t..,.........,.........
. (3iOj'
?-\ TIOS/PORCHES/DECKS
(Open Decks 'I." min. opening between
~carcs. '.vith J pervio!~s surface bela'....,
:l!: nct :~i15ider:d to ,ce imperiious)
\l\L\
v =
X =
X =
TOT ..-\.L D E CKS.~,.,..tl....t..,..,...,....................,.,......,.....
'J7:iE? (..b\'\C. e ~ ~\?T :5 \+ED
o l--l (c+ <0 2....
x
X
Cj
=
TOT A.L OTHER.......... ....... ....... ............ .................... <1.
TOTALINIPERVIOUSSUl~ACE
,.
" I
3z..'1~
I{ ,-
,...--_.-.~
T..Jl\DDEcR.:1)"': . "'-R
~_VC..l.
Prepared B;D ~'\J~~'--\ -AJ
. ". ". . ..' .... . \ . '. .
company.21I+\\"'Is" 'hI eLt.Jc.,~~_'H
..' ....... \ .' .
. .
. '. . .' -, '. .' - .
"2- \ .~ \
. Date.-J - -"1 - 'Z-ubo
,.
'Dhr ~ ~ # l\ 4.1:."".(:'""1 ")
; ',~ '. '.
. .
.~. -.
. .'
.. .
". .CITYOF~R.!OR.LAKE .
Impervious.,Surface Calculations
". ,. .. . (To be Submitted with Building Permit Application)
'For All Properties Locatedin:the~Shoreland District (SD).
'. TheivIaxim\lm Imperviou{Surface Cover~ge Permitted in 30 Percent.
Prop~rtYAddressLo~ ,~lo"2-~ .to\{ ~\N~L\S~
J)ROPO<;ED ·
. .
. .
LotArea . . . S2..()Q Sq. Feet 'x 30% = .............. 'l....~ \..eo
********~~'********************.*******~*******~************************
LENGTH.
WIDTH
SQ. FEET
HOUSE
x
x
=
ATTACHED GAR.A.GE
X:
TOT AL PRlN CIPLE STRUCTURE................;.....
DETACI-IED BLDGS
(Garag~ D N
'--a~ l? L
\1 x \lc>
\ -, \.p
x
\ iLP
TOT.li DETACHED BlHLDINGS.......................
DRr./E\v.~.Y/PA YED AREAS
x =
X =
X = ~
TOTA.L PA.. \-'ED AREAS.............~........................... ~
?.-\ nOS/PORCHES/DECKS
(Open Decks ~~~. min. opening between
beards. ',vi:;, a perviolJs surface belo';v,
u: not cc.nsicered to be imp~r"('ious) .
x =
X =
X =
TOT .-\L DECKS.:... .............. .... .................................
. l'- \ -eu.J O'C'OOC';leb
CTHER \'-1 \'
e:,\Jj
S' LP,
'- y x -z.. '-t
x
=
=
'5~lp
TOTAL OTHER.....;;............................. .................;..
TOTAL IlYIPERVIOUS SURFACE
I ""I~I. I.
~
9 /)
/~-
/ -
l~DER/ \'ER ~
Company \j ti- ~ J , ' ' - .Phone # L{41 ~ 1-c;'1.~
.,.. , -
IIIJ
!ito....1llIIl
..~~-
~~
'Ii
-
--
Iloll
-
~
L>esign Works (R), Knox Lumber" # 211, Phone # 890-2440 _
Ned Feb 24 16:32:2 I 1999=
[he materials in this garage \'t'i1l cost 53125.61
fhis Price does not
>Ian ID: CQ3723
)ra",'ing: 3-Dimensional Vie\\
~ i~ Ii'
'1'1' '
'U'
: 1: 1:
~ 1 ~ 1; :
_';5k ?o~ .:.. ~:::.......s=~::..::.:..=:: ::_ ___-=- S::.ee= 3e=::~e :-;-0:':' 3e;;.=.:: YO:l= .?=oject
Pesign Works (R), Knox Lumber" # 211, Phone # 890-2440
Vied Feb 24 16:32:2119990
Plan ID: CQ3723
Drawing: Plan View
24'
~::J;;;"'.'
i:lil
(j
;:-:.,::~
:;",;"j
1:':-;';
r.":':'
f.......
,:::::;;
t(
r
,:......
nj
'.-.-.'~
:~::..:~ .... .
~-- i~--
($1
~::::. :~
.......1
':'.-:' ~
II
i::.::~
::-:-"1
{;j
:.J...i
!...f
{:.:I
,'. ~-:..
i:..:1
"....::l
~.::.;...'."'"
...... .. .;;;;';';';};;;;;;';.};;;;;;;;;;;:;;;;..;';";;;.};;;{\;;;:';;:;};;:;}f;;;;;{;:::;;:'{;;:;;;;:;W:Q;!J{:::};.;;:;;::;:;;{;::;:}}f.:;
..... :.':.:'.i::il
;.:....
.;......
.;]
:....1
':':':'.
~.
..-....... ......
................
.. ..............
l'
. .. ...-. .
L:,'i
.: -,
::".::;
........ .......-.............
.. . .. ,....... .,-.;
:-,--'.1
;-i
:,..,,1
~Oi
~i
:.".....1
!!
:.:';.j
.:::;!
,.:i
:'-::.:
t)!
;....:1
;<'j
~iliU
~:@
::'..1'
I.:.~
HI
.... ..: . :,
.::....:.:::.:.......:......:.. ..:::..::.....::~::woJJ:.... .....
Design Works (R), Knox Lumber" # 211, Phone # 890-2440
Wed Feb 24 16:32:21 19990
Plan ID: CQ3723
Back View
': ,., ~j
i ~ 11
!~, 'j
i ,j h
q !
II 1
I; I
I: ~
I ~ :
i !
I:. I ~l
,. .
r: :
n 11
! ,1 "
i1
l~1
j~
'.
i:
t
!
!:
:1
~ :j
::1
Ii
:i
:1
il
"
ij
j
;:
~ ;
II
~
~
i
;
'I r
il .
;1 I~
II I
II I:
~l I:
:l :.
H ::
II
~l
1i
II
H
~j
il '
II
24'
~
~I
~!
,
i
!
i
,
i
11
II
!l
!j
H
~
:j
:j
'1
II
::
.:
~~
::
~l
~i
II
;1
:1
!I
:1
~i
:j
.~
I:.. ~ I
f:
I,
! 1 I
H I ~
! II ~
1"' ,
,". I
I:
ii.11 '
!Ii !
I
.'
~esign Works (R), Knox Lumber, ~ # 211, Phone # 890-2440
Wed Feb 24 16:32:21 19990
t>lan ill: CQ3723
?ront View
N
::'2
!-.
:0
11:!
:;:1
:J ::
ilil
!~ ~;
:~ ~.
i1lj
:n]
il!ij
F r,
!r
~
il 'I
~! II' I
:: ':1
[Iii III1
..1, ., .
.'!' :' :'
<IIi 1111
rill ~l ~l
:!(I ij 11
24'
SCOTT COUNTY
FINANCE DIVISION
GOVERNMENT CENTER
200 FOURTH AVENUE WEST
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379
(612) 496-8115
LEROY T. ARNOLDI
DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION, DIRECTOR
Fax: (612) 496-8135
larnoldi@co.scott.mn.us
http:/hN\\W.CO.scott.mn.us
TO: SCOTT COUNTY DEPT OF TAXATION
RE: PARCEL COMBINATION
NAME:
J0b Y1
~ev
PLEASE COMBINE PARCELS:
1.)
\ b OL(1---Q
dlS-1OO- 03~ -0 / ~ ~ 0500
3.)
d.5"-lo()-oLfI~O 1
CcLnc.e.. \
95-100-05"0-0 .
2.)
4.)
THANK YOU.
J;" !IN ft1 mEYe/<
PRINT NAME
~tI/~
. . SIGN NAME -
r;/;oh9
'DATI:
Assessor
Taxation
.
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
4E
CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND A PRELIMINARY
PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS REGAL CREST
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
_X_ YES _NO-N/A
FEBRUARY 12, 2001
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
Pavek Family Investments Company and Hodgson Trust have applied for approval of a
development to be known as Regal Crest on the property located on the west side of
CSAH 21, ~ mile north ofCSAH 82. The application includes the following requests:
· Approve a Conditional Use Permit for a cluster development;
· Approve a Preliminary Plat.
The proposal calls for a cluster townhouse development consisting of a total of 78
dwelling units on 23.81 net acres, for a total density of 3.3 units per acre. The proposed
development includes 20 dwelling units in 6 four-unit buildings, 48 dwelling units in 16
three-unit buildings and 10 dwelling units in 5 two-unit buildings. The development also
includes private open space.
Pavek Family Investments Company is the developer of this project. Hodgson Trust, the
current property owner, has also signed the application.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Total Site Area: The total site consists of 25.58 acres. The net area of this site, less
County road right-of-way and wetlands, is 23.81 acres.
Topoeraphy: This site has a varied topography, with elevations ranging from 984' MSL
at its highest point to 925' MSL at the lowest point. The high point of the site is located
in the northwest comer of the site. The site generally drains south towards the wetlands
located at the southeast comer and southwest comers of the site. The northeast comer of
1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc.doc Page I
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
.
1\
the site generally drains to the north. The property also contains areas with slopes
exceeding 20 percent, primarily surrounding the wetland.
Ve2etation: This site is a combination of woodland and pastureland. There are several
stands of significant trees, especially on the north half of the site. The project is subject
to the Tree Preservation requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has
submitted an inventory of the significant trees on the site, which identifies 6,743 caliper
inches of significant trees. The Tree Preservation Ordinance allows removal of 25% of
the total caliper inches for grading and utilities, and removal of an additional 25% of the
total caliper inches for building pads without tree replacement. Removal of additional
caliper inches requires replacement at a rate of 1/2 caliper inch for each caliper inch
removed. Initial calculations indicate tree replacement is required.
Wetlands: There are. two wetlands located within this site, with a total area of 1.24
acres. The plans indicate 22,651 square feet of wetland will be filled to allow the
construction of a road. This area will be mitigated on site in accordance with the Wetland
Conservation Act.
Access: Access to the site is from CSAH 21 on the east side of the site, and from Jeffers
Pass in Wensmann 1st Addition on the northwest side of the site. The location of the
access on CSAH 21 is directly opposite Windsong Circle. This location is dictated by
Scott County.
2020 Comprehensive Plan Desi2nation: This property is designated for Urban Low to
Medium Density Residential uses on the 2020 COinprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The
entire site is located within the current MUSA boundary.
Zonin2: The site is zoned R-l (Low Density Residential). The R-l district permits a
maximum density of3.6 units per acre.
Shoreland District: The southeast comer of the site is also located within the Shoreland
District for Prior Lake. There is no development, other than road construction, within the
Shore land District.
PROPOSED PLAN
Density: The plan proposes 78 units on a total of 25.58 acres. Density is based on the
buildable acres of the site, or in this case on 23.81 net acres. The overall density
proposed in this plan is 3.3 units per acre.
Lots: The preliminary plat consists of 78 lots for the townhouse units. There are also 5
lots for the common open space.
Buildin2 Styles: The proposed plan calls for a townhouse style development consisting
of 2-, 3- and 4-unit buildings. Sample floor plans of one of these buildings are attached
to this report. The plan includes 5 two-unit buildings, 16 three-unit buildings and 6 four-
1:\01 files\O I cup\regal crest\regal pc.doc
Page 2
unit buildings. The townhouses are designed as 1,600 to 2,100 square foot ramblers with
walkout basements, although the narrative suggests there may be some 1 12 story.
buildings as well. All of the units have either double or triple car attached garages. The
exterior materials are brick and some sort of siding. The developer has submitted plans
and elevations for only the 3-unit buildings: Plans and elevations, including all four sides
ofthe buildings, must be submitted for all proposed styles of buildings.
Setbacks: The plan proposes a 25' setback from the front property line, a minimum 25'
rear yard setback, and a minimum 20' building separation (foundation to foundation)
between the townhouses. The plan also notes a 30' setback from any wetland.
The proposed setbacks are generally consistent with the Zoning Ordinance requirements.
The Subdivision Ordinance also requires that all building pads be located at least 30'
from the 100 year flood elevation of any wetland or NURP pond. This must also be
verified on the plans.
Lot Coverage: The R-l district allows a maximum ground floor area of 0.30. The
ground floor area proposed in this plan is 0.19.
Useable Open Space: The R-l district also requires a minimum of 600 square feet of
useable open space per unit for cluster developments. The proposed common area
provides open space for this development; the calculations indicate 3.2 acres of open
space, or 1,815 square feet per unit.
Parking: The proposal provides at least 2 spaces per dwelling unit, which is consistent
with the minimum Zoning Ordinance requirements. Based on the site plan, 28 units have
two car garages, and 50 units have 3 car garages, providing 206 parking spaces. The plan
does not provide any specific off-street guest parking, other than the areas located in the
driveways.
Landscaping: Section 11 07.1900 lists the landscaping requirements for this
development. Perimeter landscaping is required for the townhouse portion of the
development with buildings consisting of 3 or more units at a rate of 1 tree per unit or 1
tree per 40' feet of perimeter, whichever is greater. Staff calculations indicate a total of
119 trees are required for this site.
The landscaping plan submitted provides the proper number of trees for the development.
However, the plan is not consistent with ordinance requirements for size and species of
the plantings. The ordinance requires at least 25% of the trees must be deciduous and
25% coniferous to maintain a mix of plant types. The ordinance also requires at least
20% of the plants must exceed the minimum sizes of 2 1/2 caliper inches for deciduous
and 6' for coniferous. This requires deciduous trees be at least 3 1/2 caliper inches and
coniferous trees be at least 8' high. The plan also does not indicate whether an irrigation
system will be provided. Additionally, the landscaping plan is not consistent with the
grading plan in that trees are located within the area identified as a temporary cul-de-sac
on the south side of the property.
1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc.doc
Page 3
Tree Replacement: As noted above, the applicant has submitted an inventory.
identifying 6,743 caliper inches of significant trees on the site. Based on the grading
plan, the proposal removes 7.8% for road and utility purposes and 52.8% for building
pads and driveways.
Tree replacement will be required. Since replacement is required at a rate of 1/2 caliper
inch to 1 caliper inch removed, at least 375 trees at 2 1/2 caliper inches per tree will be
required for replacement.
The landscaping plan identifies 332 trees for the required tree replacement. It does not
indicate how the remaining requirement will be satisfied.
Sie:ns: This site plan does not include any project monument signs
Lie:htine:: Street lights will be provided on the public streets.
Streets: This plan proposes three new public streets. Jeffers Pass is the major street and
extends 1,450' from CSAH 21 to Jeffers Pass at the northwest comer of the site. This
street is designed with a 55' wide right-of-way, a 32' wide surface and sidewalk along the
southwest side of the street.
The second street is Street "A", which is located on the north side of Jeffers Pass and
extends 750' to the east property line. This street is designed as a local residential street
with a 55' wide right-of-way, a 32' wide surface, and sidewalk located on the southeast
side of the street. Since this street is currently a dead-end, a temporary cul-de-sac will be
provided at the east end of the street. This street provides future access to the property
directly east of this site. The alignment, if extended, will eventually provide access to
CSAH 21 across from Lords Street.
Street "B" is a 250' long north/south street located on the south side of Jeffers Pass, and
extending to the south property line. This street is also designed with a 55' wide right-of-
way, a 32' wide surface, and sidewalk on the west side. The street also provides future
access to the property to the south, and includes a temporary cul-de-sac.
Sidewalks/Trails: The plan proposes sidewalk along one side of all of the streets. A
private trail is shown within the common open space.
Parks: This plan does not include any parkland dedication. A 12 acre park was recently
dedicated in Wensmann 1 sl Addition to the west of this site. Access to that park is
available via the public sidewalks. Parkland dedication for this development will be
satisfied by a $33,254.00 cash dedication in lieu of land.
Sanitary Sewer and Water Main: Sanitary sewer and water main will be extended
from the existing utilities located in CSAH 21. The extension of these lines is within the
1:\01 files\O1 cup\regal crest\regal pc.doc
Page 4
proposed street right-of-ways. The developer has also extended to the services to the
adjacent property located on the east and on the south.
Storm Sewer: The plan proposes a series of storm sewer pipes and catch basins that
direct runoff to a NURP pond located on .t4e e~st side of the site. The City Engineering
staff is reviewing the storm water calculations to ensure the ponds are adequately sized to
manage the runoff. It appears the volume of runoff to the property to the south will be
increased. The developer will be required to obtain a drainage easement on the property
to the south.
Phasin2: This project is proposed to be completed in two phases beginning in 200l.
The first phase consists of 33 units located on the east half of the site. The second phase
includes the remaining 45 units.
ANALYSIS:
Conditional Use Permit Plan: The proposed CUP must be reviewed in accordance with
the criteria found in Section 1108.202 of the Zoning Ordinance. This section provides
that a conditional use shall be approved if it is found to meet specific criteria. These
criteria and the staff analysis of compliance with these criteria are set forth below.
(1) The use is consistent with and supportive of the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The Low to Medium Density Residential designation allows townhomes and cluster
housing up to 10 units per acre. This development is consistent with those goals, and
with the policy to provide a mix of residential housing styles.
(2) The use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare
of the community as a whole.
This use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of
the community. The use is consistent with the adjacent development.
(3) The use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and
the Use District in which the Conditional Use is located.
With some modifications to the landscaping plan, the use will meet the provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance.
(4) The use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities,
services, or improvements which are either existing or proposed.
The developer will install all utilities necessary to serve this site. The sewer lines
have the capacity to serve this site. The proposed NURP pond will be designed to
accommodate runoff from this site.
(5) The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of
properties in close proximity to the conditional use.
1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc.doc
Page 5
The use is similar to the approved Wensmann 1 sl development and will not have an
adverse affect on the that property. The property to the south may be affected by.
runoff. This can be mitigated by the acquisition of drainage easements on that
property.
(6) The use is subject to the design and other requirements of site and landscape
plans prepared by or under the direction of a professional landscape architect,
or civil engineer registered in the State of Minnesota, approved by the City
Council and incorporated as part of the conditions imposed on the use by the
City Council.
A civil engineer has prepared the plans. As noted above, with some modifications,
the plans meet all requirements ofthe Zoning Ordinance.
(7) The use is subject to drainage and utility plans prepared by a professional civil
engineer registered in the State of Minnesota which illustrate locations of city
water, city sewer, fire hydrants, manholes, power, telephone and cable lines,
natural gas mains, and other service facilities. The plans shall be included as
part of the conditions set forth in the Conditional Use Permit approved by the
City Council.
The plans have been prepared by a civil engineer and reviewed by the City
Engineering Department. Some modifications are required, and will be made prior
to approval ofthe final plat for this site.
(8) The use is subject to such other additional conditions which the City Council
may find necessary to protect the general welfare, public safety and
neighborhood character. Such additional conditions may be imposed in those
situations where the other dimensional standards, performance standards,
conditions or requirements in this Ordinance are insufficient to achieve the
objectives contained in subsection 1108.202. In these circumstances, the City
Council may impose restrictions and conditions on the Conditional Use Permit
which are more stringent than those set forth in the Ordinance and which are
consistent with the general conditions above. The additional conditions shall be
set forth in the Conditional Use Permit approved by the City Council.
The suggested conditions and modifications for approval of this plan are listed
below, and must be incorporated into the plans prior to final approval by the Council.
Section 1102.403 (1) lists the specific criteria for a cluster development in the R-l
district. These criteria are discussed below:
a. Cluster housing shall meet the following minimum requirements: (1) No more
than four dwelling units shall be incorporated in a single building; (2) The density
of development shall not exceed the density allowed in an "R-1" Single Family
Residential Use District; (3) This subsection shall not be applied to conversion of
existing dwelling units into cluster housing but may be applied to site clearance
and redevelopment. Existing units may be incorporated into new development
1:\01 files\OI cup\regal crest\regal pc.doc
Page 6
plans when such units are not converted or added to; (4) There shall be 600 square
feet of usable open space for each dwelling unit.
The proposal meets the above criteria. In order to ensure the open space is easily
accessible to all residents of the development, an access from Jeffers Pass should be
provided. Currently, the only access to this area is shown on the south end of the
property.
b. The applicant shall clearly demonstrate through the application and site plan that
a superior development would result by clustering. The presence of a superior
development shall be determined by reference to the following criteria: (1) The
presence and preservation of topographic features, woods and trees, water bodies
and streams, and other physical and ecological conditions; (2) Suitable provisions
for permanently retaining and maintaining the amenities and open space; (3)
Locating and clustering the buildings to preserve and enhance existing natural
features and scenic views, aesthetically pleasing building forms and materials,
addition of landscaping to screen development, recognition of existing
development and public facilities, and consistency with City goals and plans for
the areas.
This site is suitable for cluster development due to the topography, wetlands and the
existing trees on the site. The proposal attempts to preserve many of the steep slopes by
designating this area as common open space. Some modifications to the plans,
however, will improve the preservation of these slopes and preserve more of the mature
trees. These modifications include the following:
· Eliminate the units identified as Lots 6-8, Block 3, 2nd Addition. This will preserve
slopes exceeding 20% as well as some of the mature trees.
· Eliminate the units identified as Lots 9-11, Block 2, 2nd Addition. This will preserve
several mature trees.
· Limit the buildings on the north side of Street "A", shown as Lots 12-21, Block 2,
2nd Addition, to 2- and 3-unit buildings. This will enable the buildings to be spaced
further apart and will preserve more mature trees.
· Center the temporary cul-de-sac on the east end of Street "A", and move the
building identified as Lots 1-4, Block 3, 2nd Addition, to the north so it is setback
25' from the permanent right-of-way. This will preserve additional trees.
Preliminary Plat: The primary issue relating to the preliminary plat is the storm water
runoff to the property to the south. This issue can be mitigated by the acquisition of a
drainage easement. It is the developer's responsibility to obtain this easement.
There are also several engineering issues remaining; however, these issues can be
resolved prior to approval ofthe final plat.
Staff Recommendation: The major outstanding issue pertaining to this development is
the staff recommendation for the elimination of certain units. This has an effect on the
design of the site. However, it is possible to allow this application to move forward with
1:\01 files\O1 cup\regal crest\regal pc.doc
Page 7
a specific recommendation to the Council. The design issues, including the number of
units, the landscaping and tree preservation plans, and the submittal of building
elevations must be addressed prior to City Council review. On that basis, the staff
recommends approval, subject to the following conditions:
1. The plans must be modified to remove- the following units:
a. Eliminate the units identified as Lots 6-8, Block 3, 2nd Addition.
b. Eliminate the units identified as Lots 9-11, Block 2, 2nd Addition.
c. Limit the buildings on the north side of Street "A", shown as Lots 12-21, Block 2,
2nd Addition, to 2- and 3-unit buildings.
d. Center the temporary cul-de-sac on the east end of Street "A", and move the
building identified as Lots 1-4, Block 3, 2nd Addition, to the north so it is setback
25' from the permanent right-of-way.
2. Revise the landscaping plan and tree replacement plan to meet the minimum
ordinance requirements. In addition, an irrigation plan must be provided.
3. Provide building elevations, including all sides of the building, and floor plans for all
proposed building styles.
4. Submit plans in a 50:1 scale to enable staff to verify setbacks.
5. Provide street names for the public streets.
6. Address the following comments from the City Engineer:
a. Submit a wetland replacement application.
b. Provide a grading plan at a scale 1" = 50' or larger.
c. Provide a map showing existing drainage conditions. (Same scale as proposed
conditions.)
d. Show the 100-year HWL for wetland #1.
e. Storm calculations should be provided for 2, 10 & 100 year-24 hour event storms,
for both existing and proposed conditions (exclude the I-year event).
f. The design storm runoff for sizing the NURP pond for 32% impervious area and
impervious CN = 61 is 0.93 inches of runoff. Resize the NURP pond accordingly.
g. Provide an emergency overflow from wetland #1 such that adjacent units are 2'
above the EOF, or provide a secondary outlet pipe under the entrance road with an
inlet elevation of938.5.
h. Provide an access road to the NURP pond for maintenance purposes with a slope
::; 8%, with a width of 10' .
1. Maximum slope of grading in maintained areas is 4: 1.
J. On street 'A', use DIP - Class 52 sewer pipe for depths ~ 26'.
k. All of the manholes on street 'A' (page 6) are labeled as Manhole 8.
1:\01 files\O 1 cup\regal crest\regal pc.doc
Page 8
1. Show the plan view of the utilities on the plan/profile sheets.
m. A drop manhole will be required for Manhole 10.
n. Obtain temporary construction easements where off-site grading is occurring.
o. Show hydrant spacing on the utility plans, and show the utility lines as different
line types. .
p. The street grade shall not exceed 2.00% for the first 100' approaching the"
intersection with C.R. 21.
q. Design the vertical curves according to the Prior Lake Design Manual.
(Sag: K= 36 for 30 mph, Crest: K = 30 for 30 mph)
r. Use SDR 26 pipe for 8" sewer for depths between 16' -26' (street 'B').
s. Refer to the Prior Lake Design Manual for preparation of plans and specifications.
t. Look at alternative ways of connecting to the existing sanitary sewer.
u. Provide sign elevations and greater detail on the location of the proposed
monument signs.
v. Identify the private streets as outlots on the preliminary and final plat.
w. Provide calculations about the useable open space for the townhouse
development.
x. Verify the 100 year flood elevations for the wetlands and NURP ponds and
provide a 30' setback from this elevation for all structures.
7. Address the following comments from the Scott County Engineer:
a. Provide a right-turn lane, designed to County standards, on CSAH 21 at Jeffers
Pass.
b. Remove the existing driveway on CSAH 21 and grade to match right-of-way.
c. Obtain permits from the County for any work in the County right-of-way.
8. Obtain permit from the Watershed District.
9. All necessary permits from other agencies must be obtained and submitted to the City
prior to final plat approval, or prior to approval of a grading permit.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
At this time, the Planning Commission should make a recommendation on the proposed
CUP and Preliminary Plat.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the CUP and the Preliminary Plat subject to the above
conditions.
1:\01 fiJes\O1 cup\regal crest\regal pc.doc
Page 9
2. Table this item to a date specific, and provide the developer with direction on the
issues that have been discussed.
3. Recommend denial of the request.
4. Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning staff recommends Alternative #1.
ACTION REQUIRED:
A motion and second recommending ;approval ofthe following requests:
· Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to be known as regal Crest subject to the above
conditions;
· Approval of a Preliminary Plat to be known as Regal Crest, subject to the above
conditions.
EXHIBITS:
1. Location Map
2. Reduced Copy of CUP and Preliminary Plat Plans
3. Developer's Narrative
4. Letters from Adjacent Property Owners
5. Engineering Comments
6. Scott County Engineer Comments
7. Watershed District Comments
8. Finance Director Comments
1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc.doc
Page 10
Location Map
'-"\
'1\ \
-wlJJfj..T-' ~ ~_~ .~ .ll{1:. ~
J:/!~j} ~ .-. ~~... ',. '/~ t;;
'-...:)r I. C{ .f '1 .L..:- i- f-'- 'YO. . . ~/.. .:..L
~~. . ., ", rr-:,.... 9:
/)..,v .t-;- ., .~1.1.1', .1. . ~'I.:.. '1'-' .
3.~ ~~ ~,.. ,: :~,I:!..-\.. "~(".
d ~~ ::i: ,: J-7- ~~,!!~'~"
H -=--=- .. . yo:;..J .
K .-. u:: :: :..~< .....
iT. ;r. .1fT . :T. u -:- _ .
~
1 --r - -- -.... ",'
J - I - ~ "'~ .
~ '~ ~~. i~r-;f.:" ~.
~ ~I-' "" K ".SL:!.r-.T ,~t:J
TIJ:h . - ~.'..':::;7~.:':.'3.:...~,~.:.l,.~---;..;~..~.~,-
~~~~~ I ~~f7Ji
~ . ~~, \~ ':- .'..,
~ '2, . , , -==J ~
. - . r-)-. -- :~;' illw ~
~ ,~,~~ /?
- -. -... .1-\-.J.:. rtf V.A.-.:l'
~~?/ ~-F~f~IC;;:;;;' w U l- \.:.HII.nIIJ --i -. ..\\\1. <?~rj.
~ . ~ -rr t= ::;:],.. '. (! i~1 1\h
> U ",<".....:-0. ........"''''' Efi! ~~ ~t1"""""'l/ 'I~~':'~
~ ?.....<:~.....:;j~~/~'_: ~/. ". ...... ! ".. V\'\:-\' .\1'Illi-$:{
~~-~~ .... ". . " '. ,"t.'F.,u. .,\\~~
:'--L~~A'\J. '~.'~'. '. '. m'~~~~
< ~~^'~Y^-~ 0 ". ..... XX"~~~\7"
./ - j ,"/.~y.V 0-.:.Y ._-. ",-<:;.).. -::G:\ .\\.' J
. -\iflFL....jjs7....... -~".'~ ~~\q~)~-
~i2!J~....4'-~~.. /;"':"- ~" \ ~'.tt~ ~nt
~.. :'1~'y. '--/~:l' . __ ,-i. . ~ ~ ...."'.
\ / (.!.I.-mfJt; f1'TT:--v '\# ~
~ \' .~ \\\\\\\\.U\\\\\I\~ f~\\' . ~('L=J-:-.1b
~ \~r~ ~\~;~1'2~
\\; -- R=:m.... '/lA'<4.\o~
~~\loo' Y; M" ",-,-" ......- /.)-...~...--\I-
--l
"
----
~
N
A
700
I
o
700 1400 Feet
I
~
nmm
lip';;'
!id I ~Fii1
: ;flUi
l .1
l\~~~;: il
~{~ 'il
~l~ iiI~ f;~ii~~
m I f~~ - I J
11 ll~" JFI izz ~~ ~--; i
(iin' i '! "' eff .d~NI- ~ J.
bnl I 111 Ii! ~~ I!~~ i I!
"!mll if' ~ Iii Ah III =J~"
lin J ~ iilllEilljjl!l '1 ~~~~
,. ISH - I 1 IJI~~
'hI ~ i ~~I~I!i ;~i~ ~;~
~I~ !! ~~~+~~Ji!): ;&l:;:~ p~~
s ~ ~,~'l~ <<~.55C ."geS
~ ~ ~ ~n < [~. n"~~~ ~~,;~
~i! F~~GuJ~r:r:
i If UJ~l
, m s ~~ Q ili 1-- "l l
J JJJ J JJ I" -i ,u ~ 1
! p
~,~~u i
n ~J"~i I
ge I ~ ..
~i I
s ! , /
1 5 I = , I
r-~ I. ~ I ~ /-. /
/ .......,H- -' 1,/1 "\ I
<'lt~~ . =:. ---! / >/
~ I
11
l!~-l!1~~l~!J!il
diU*[lhl~l&i
HI~Ilb l~fl D ji
II ~ J I
f
v
<~ $-e--~
(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)
::T::T::T::T:T:J:
::::::gl:g~
c:...............r+-t
~U1N.....-
(11 Z
I 0
01 fTI
"-l"",,X
g~ ~ ~ al
(I ::::::
o,,???
::J.,
0.1: !i7~ 3!
,,(10=0
..,'0.--"'"
o~--..<
::!I....::J
ii" ,roO 3!
III ::J "0
'-::J
:;00
(I::J
~~
0.,
00
(I III
3 o'
(I::J
~(")
"g
-....
0.,
::JQ.
fl"
-/ ,..--..,---,----t
.-..-.-. .~~"A~d.f~n~~g ff . i. i . 1
-""-.: ,~<l .~ I ____L__J___~
'I :'-":-r--.:."~"... ~~," '4.~ ~ o/l}/' .... =-= l : .":'-'- ,
i ~~. '~~ ( U~. ~ (; ~/;; ~ J ~--T~~--r----l
. i fr "'1 ...~~ \... \ I.:] , . N I :. I :
b-.: ..JI . ~~ \ ~,.,' ,.. , ~..!. I
I~--"~/.~ \ \ -~ j 4 I~ ::~~ -------------
Il--. _, \ , ' - i LQC.)' ~ 'Ifd ~ ~:J./
I~~~,,~'~ ~I' .~/ -.... ~~~.~.
~. '. '$/.1;;L. ) J: !J'!' I
~,. (\: r
... ..~ (l. . !f7/~ l:.;. i'1 ~ ,
~ ~. . v t'G .~. .
~ ,~~./-'" i.. :: - I :1.:,~
.~ I~>>);;; '";> ,/~~ I. :j:: t:'t
--r; 'i../I./I. , . . 1'!rI i .. .
.'i1I9 { t5 ~~~~,. !E;. I "1.1... I tit:
~ .~. ~/ 111 r't!;n! ~','
, ~nt:#I :t;:1. fI' rt.. .-
jli"f hJllJ '"",'.... JJ' J =..: il I \ :
':'t1 :ilf r i "mil' ,! '
1-. Ill, ':';';l fl ! a ~. / '
Jrt- ....~ . '7;: ! ! : I. II :
/111 !I r )r~c"'! -~;;:;i : / i :
~---------- '~{_------~ _1_ ,i ~ "'.' ------"] ! Ii,
(10_'-' ,-;;; -:.~ c- ~-I-,! -- :
!r. ~ -_ 1-.1.;-...-.1"': I i I
_~ .." ~ - -- on J J L_ ___ ___ ~
r- - --! ~i1jTt~=!;=i=i ~----~;~f::-~-~~-^~~i~@"'-- 'I
:~~ I - i ~\\\ ~d;il
g
:0
m
<
-
w
m
c
n
): ~
~
J1
o
::J
.
f
J
~
~
:' //
;L./
---
ft ~! . =:;~..~:: I r I -..
-. PREIMIfARY PLAT ;;;:;-....aly- TERRA ENGINEERING. INC.
. ? ~
- ~-.:.. ~ "t':'.. -.-- ... ~_A"",
0 'g ~ REGAL CREST -~- ~H . HN 55422
01 PRIOR LAKE. MINNESOTA ...., .. ...... --.sae:u
- ....... '46U rIvI.. ~ .. ,..- ____ _ ""-..-
~ni[1 ~ !
. ':' II
~Hil
il
~~"ll\t; ~~
~ ,. a
.
. I
~ .
. !
!.
~jiGi~~~~~rllyf~ej~
G;~~!i~!~:o :~ &'
'~aLI~I~Wt~.IlSIY~
I.f~~ ~~.~Ir ~J!l~
~ ~ J ~ i~
i~
I
~
n
~i
a_
f'
I aB
~ .~
~-
w
~
-::-
i
)
I
~ ~
~ e
~
S
~
p
~
~
~
~
f
)
~
~
~
e
--
I
Iii
,
.."
'ooo'~-------__
Dl$1IIICT --_ e
(lOPfIK'<<lNCE) f--
, - ..-.
_ S! I .- -
----IC..::~~!!:D. ______. Ii:" . "": ~__ -- -- --; ---:-~;
r - - - - - - ~+-I"';;;::~' ;:;--=."'-- ::.:-::.:------:J.:::~.;~----""...-r 1--1--"''''
1 {'----rg:-+.!pr=r-.. - - -,- - -=o..~ - - ")'
I ! P I~l~' i~' I f "'- \ \ ~ I
, I I~l~ r f \ ~ '
I~~I \ It;,
I I I , iI
L
A 0 ( -:
.0- '"
fI,) .!..~
~ g -- REGAL CREST
PRIOR LAKE. MINNESOTA
=.;-==-.~::
~-':-'1.. ~...
-,,-
III
He
TERRA ENGINEERING, INC.
6001 Gl.,.,rrood AlOP.
HWwapoIls, HN !SS422
_JOl!SI
PREI.JMItARY UlIJ1Y PLAN
-.-
... ........ 14&14
"'" - L.,w
(TI'UI'!; 'Mll~
f l,l '1 f '!Irt~r! ~
((P. I . !
J~HI~f!h 1:'1'1
hHiUJni,111
I't~h :It'f~rll
' 'i It t ICf.
~ iff. l'i'ltfl'
'bit II il~ II
~!l' 1 .iifl }{t
ill~ ~& ~!!: l:l
11~ld iU!1 it!
ll~fll h'lh Hi
;n ft. th
i d 'II. I il'
· Pitt I \11
f, I lei, '11
r n hn ill
11 H!i. 'l~
1 f . :1' Iti
..t t
rr t
~t
I~I
~ p~ll~
i 9 i! I!
i111
I I
I
~~riiD
~jUlI
""
II
g I
l-m i~ll~1
tint ti-ill
l,ib Jit-!lI
foui i,.1!
I~ii~ III !
'II! ~ i
~l' -.;
~ ~
~ ~
il il
l!l\"llll
j j'
: I
$ .
1 g
$ ~ ~
~
8
ii ~~~ m~~
~ ..~ ~~~~~
I
.- I
. ~ . '.:~ I
. -:<>~'" I
:~~-~~ I
';";~'" I
. .. 0;"
." ,",:-,
I o~ -- PREI.JMICAR'( GRAIlHJ/llRAINAGE PLAN =l"::~-~~:: III TERRA ENGINEERING, INC.
. y. ~ EROSlClH CClN1RClL PLAN ~-.:...~~.. --.'-- --.. ~'"""" "wo.
u.I ~ -..- ---,--- Is. #IN :!i!U22
0 - REGAL CREST en - ~
QI PRIOR lAKE MINNESOTA -~-
- ........,.... . ---.----
~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~. I
~~ '
ii.. ..~-+---~ ~__ _..i,,-__ _?'?~
- ----- 1";1 Mol
1"\ - "."""~ ......'_(.,.':111. I
T~ ~e I~ NOOT." .5H.n - -: 1-- SrnJ'z!J-. 'MU)f - - ~ _ _.
~~=.l~",i.:l TI I ' +
tb "'--~'::-----------frr-k-___~_I! I 111-"
,--+-+..,...~~...!~ - =-=-=-=-=-=-=1=---:~--_....!'=--"'-~-'~-- -----"
t ~-----.r~-_+~rl~:l---Q.~'fAGLE CREEK AVE<<~NE (CO.Rb.21) - \ \ I
p Il, ,,' J. E' I
I : Ill!ll n " ~ \ \ I
S 8!~'~1 j= ~\ ;1
~ "I C'l ~ I
8 I ~ ~l e=-- ~ \ \ \
11'1 ~ $> ~~\\\
ai,. .
~
~
~
~
~
~f~~n~~i.
({:r:ril:r:ra;
ooo:le!l,o.
a~;ihtt~"
r"! 1 ":ri!:r
i~.ri d il
i:rfi ili ~
.Ho i e
hi~ i. if
Ui~ - i
!!!t i
3i ::.
f
~
SOO7D.,.... 1K OZ
,
~ JEFTERSPASS
~
"
"
I~
I~ i ~
hi
l~
I;
I
~
a
~
d\'~
t;!~
-.
"'~
(COT. 125eU)
(aRT. 87t80)
(aRT. 11.1325)
~ ?! I =:=-..==.;:: III TERRA ENGINEERING. INC.
~. TREE PRESERVA1ION/hEF'lACEMENT PLAN
~I ~ ~-.:..~.....,- ~1rOOd 1I.....t!I!
...~- Is, HN :55.-
0 ~ ~. REGAL CREST He ..- -----
CD -~- -t_.................._
PRIOR LAKE MINNESOTA - ........,..... .... r.
L_
-
m~m .i.lli.~i 0.1;;;; :ii:;i;;: :;::::'" ,;:',:::::,::a:;
;;iHHH THiHi ;i;ii}~ THHH HHi}; ;::"':;i i~;d;i~
mmm :+::.:,: :W.:. !mm~ ..:=-.::.11:,':::: 11!::111
..... ......::.:,:;:;:;::;::,:;::;:;:;:,:,;:::;::It:;::F
~!~~ ..r!% iT.f. i.lll1I.. i~.@ !11!il~
:;~L: Li,;~:;.;.;:: <;;:;; :.<~:: ':::::.1
MtP."." a. a. na"./WSD,.
r-.. _.... .....
,
...
......... .........
......... ........
. ......... .........
. ......... .........
......... ....... .....
......... ......... ......... ......... ...
RTT is'!!!' IT:s+ ;;!!.;;:i H:'::.!! :~HIT:
::::::::::::::::..::::::.:::::;::::=::::::y:
:'iH~ ::mmr /::0 :~~: ~~.::~:. r:
~~: ~~ ::~:..:.:.:.:.: ;;~~: -::~:..:.:::: "
~iliiu 1IIIiliii II!I!II- ijj~ --iiii I:'
~!!II !m]!1 lilil- ~jl!lliil!l.
::::::::: ::::::::: ::::::::: ::::::::: ::::::.::
~]!-I i-IIII!II-i!i!!11 i_llll_ mrl
~~~~~~~~~ H~~~~~~~ +Pf HH~HH ~HH;
mmlJ iiiiliill Iliilw Ilijjijli!ii'
:ii:i:::: !lii::i:! i.i:i:;:: ;i::::ii: ~'
Ii!
lEI
1111'
II~
~'ttr
;~J
!ii
&,
i_-_Ii i~ j-~i:1 lil-
~
~
~
U)
~
~
~
.
(Jl
......... ......... ......... .........
.-...... .._..~... --"-- --._--
......... ......... ......... .........
.. ......... ......... .........
........ .........
..... ......... .........
......... ......... .........
......... ......... .........
........ ......... ........
1m:::: nIT::::: :~:= :::
. ...... .........
.. ......... .........
........ ......... ......... ......... .........
....... ......... ......... ......... .........
......... ......... .........
......... ......... .........
......... ......... .........
::-:::;-::'::::MI" :JJI;M ::-::-:::::::::-:-::::
Jlllii lill .11!ii~ ~iii
r s
s
~ i
~$c:~
PRIOR LAKr, "'NNE:SOTA
=::===.....:". III
~-':"''1.~..
-~-
Us
TERRA ENGINEERING, INC.
t~1e::N,A~
(1U-6Ii.J-ee)
PLAN AND PROFIE
-~-
""" ... .... 14844
"" -t_
.+.
t.j,::;:,
..
..
......
liC:::
~c::;
~tc:
'.'
!;,C:::
t;;::::::
'toi::::::
i~C:~
.. : : : : :
i)j : : : :
: : :
:
~
.
0)
~ !
~
::::::::: :::::::j;
::tit::!: HiH
::::::::: ::::::;~
,:,;:;:;: ;:,;:;:!
::::::::: :::::::-~
......... .......
[.....J:: !::::::I
......... .........
......... .........
.
~.
~
/ Ii!
~~}
fir:..
lJ;;
..~~
j;~'
11""
ll~
ll~
.
..
-Ii
;;;;::T ~
:::::::,:r
HI1IIlil
::::::: 't:.
....... ~::
.........
.... ....
::~.
,,;::,:;: ::(
...:::':: ::r
. .'-: !
.:<:1
......... ......
:..:::..: ::::t.;
::::::::: ::::i:
::::::::: ::::l:
':::::::: ::::~
:::-::.:J J::JI
:H<HI
......... ......
tr)
::ti
~
-J
:h.
......
.........
~ ~
~
E
~
~.
<0
~
=:==~-.::
~-":"'*"L-=h
....~-
PLAN AND PRa'I.E
........~
OII'M ........,......
I .
~~
III
ru
TERRA ENGINEERING, INC.
Z~:~~A~22
r---USJ
(hi -1_
'1 <'" I
I . +
I C'
<'" I
~
.?-
./ I
0
-1-- ,
I
'Wea ...~ -t~-=-_n ~_t _ f __
~ .--:~.
1
.
I
70\..0
rtl-\
i~li I "U!llI~1I1E1 I lJ () rrJ
UBI iII=....ru.~... 7OJ>
CJ n. U!IIIIIIIII O'r-
III 70 (I )>
702
'rtlO
III I I~'I' ~(f\\..0
IU I pI
I. a I rtl-l(J ".i
0 : .'.1
U UUlliW1i ~O J> " I, ~ i
'II II llii Z:e::\J I ffi ":,1
111111 II Ii II, 1111 ZzrtI I I;,';~I
II' i
II I II ~:r\J r 8
I 00r- I ...~ ,
II . 1:"1
Ii' t -I~)> ~- '-'.
, J>rtl:z -j
'" :~.;5;=::::: ----:-.... ,
..~ ii~ =5=5 (f\
w '1' ,11
0 .1. !! i...~....I..
0 Iii
~... .
'-
-,
-(
"
R
F:
C
'2:
=;
..,
o
c
Z
'1
t.
-,
6
z
---.-....--.-..--
~c::-~~
----[iiJi]
~ @
[iliiJ
=
~ cS
_\t2;-=-~~==?J
11
;0'
a
z
-I
f1I
r
f1I
<
)>
j
a
z
c:
z
--;
:l>
I'-.:>
I'll
IIi Ii
U1";1]
CB
,
,
I
I
--------r---
I
,
,
L_-T ------.
, ,
, I
, ,
, I
I ,
I I
, ,
, I
_J
i
I
_ __ _______________J
~
o
o
~
]
r
}
Z
'1"11 ~
iil:I'
1-,::11
i:ll.
'10.
S'-9 ",' II
11Ml"'" ~
1l1:!J8RICIlCOlS '"
II ~
i i COVERED
~:CONC STOOP
V-'-II
/ @] !i
/ II T.o' Ill!
I
~7i
:!!~I!
i
I
I
I
VAULTED
POR~H
SUN,RM
I
I
!
I
I
Ni
b*1!
!!,
DINING
''''3
b
:R
/1--
(' .
~
~
I
...
4'-0.
.",.J
....."'"
n'-s"
'/'
2~O ..
","'"
// "
L2:/ KITCHEN ~ :r-
iB 15'6Xl0. L
~ir ~ ~~ -1~
hi 1N1' V I-
WO,..... jl/ ~II ,~~L)~
lIN '\'l:' '" )
. r ( WNERS ~ "f-::
BA TH _ f I-
0"",,,1/1 ~ ~
~i'" ~ : WIC ~
~ oTOC
~ 2-o~ r O.
\. Z~1i ..11(lU 10
IS'-&"
39'-0.
~
".
~~"
r', --------------71
I .' I
I ''r----------/ I .,.
I I I I "
I I I I
I I I I
! 'OPTIONAL PAN VAULT I I
:b i GREAT RM : : CJ
112 I 16x18 I 1,11=
I I I I J
I I I '[1f~OEO
I I I I GAS
I -" J.. I FP
"'~ , / ''''';
, ).-------/ /.
", / \. //
v.________y
--E:l. ..... ,,' somT 0
12.12 BOX COl..S
(>
FOYER
3-0
ON
~ ~
.,'-,'
6'-4"
~ ,
...
"
~.,~,
"\ "l::J 6
DEN / BR ~ 1/2 [I-
13x10'8 ~ -Or
11,.0 \' I\.,..
.,.1
~~~
~-I-
I 3'-0' I~
~ to'-S"
b
\\
8X7 OH DR
~
t
....
b
~
--
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
b
~
16X7 OH DR I
1-
~
r
~
,I
I
I
-.J
I
I
o
I
".
EJ .'POCb,.,
· AUND U :
-.,. MUD-~
0" :~
LIN If BlC SP ~
.,.
...
DROP GARAGE PLATES 1'-0' FROM HOUSE
GARAGE
30x24
-- -----,
I I
! L____I_.I.!~Qf_S!R~I:I1~~BA!iC___'____
33'.0"
r:O-
I ,'_n"
3000
....
,'0"
.
12'-0.
DECK
.,.
"
12 x 12
B-O SGD
TRANS OVER
HEARTH RIA
12x14 9
':!
LIN
,'.n"
O'.S'
JOl1~2
.... "'"
-
A1
b018 SQF i 1y
39X86 .,.
-
9' CEILINGS TYPICAL
,.'.n'
6....
'-'
lUllING
NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE CE'IlER LINE
OF THE AIR SPACE- MAKE FRA~IINr, AND
MASONRY ADJUSTMENTS PER DE fAIL THIS PAGE.
00
,.~ J
^
===
M
~ ,.
0
-=-
X6 w' DOL ~
a' o'
l .~ 0
-I OW~IE S .,.
BAT 0
10'-0'
-- X
UN I
JJO ALTERN A TE #1
., /~.. .,' ,........
F _ J c::::> ~ F= L .c'::>.... f'-..J
~=
C:NT{" ~Itl[
2d'. I ,
,s~ ,
( ,
, I
I
J-"lllsPACE ,
~;r~~EN SfUO_ - '
J"
( ~~,,<
THISPAG[
FRAMING/MASONRY DETAIL
AT PARTY WALL
SC.ll!;1j2".1'-O.
~
..
WIC '"
11'-0'
"""'"
,~
. .
~ OWNERS .,.
,
,., BATH
... J'-8" ---,
LA ND ~ 10' o.
Ol
M D ~
, ., 0
..
)
AL TERNA TE #2
":' WIC
..
l(r-o'
-:-,
~~
LAl:~ l-"
M.,. D~;
. '~
tJ6EJ ~
_ . AUND ~ ~
BATH >[ "-',:, MUD-(
o 0 c,. .-o~
I~' '" ./,:;;~
ALT BATH ~
__ I
!
n'-(/'
~ I '- ~ DECK -==
b )9'-0' '0 , 'v ;.:',!m
- :I:~" ..-/
r -------.-------7
/
! /
I ;------ u-----r
, I I
i , I
I , I
I , OPT PAN VAULTEO I
I I GREAT RM I
Iy I I ~
i~ I I
I 16,18 SEE
I I " THRU
I I I CAS
~ I I I rP
I I I 11-
I .J-----------l iT
I / \~-i
I
<L ----.--. ------_-.\.'
- I" SCFnl 0
12.12: lOX ca.s
HEARTH RM
12x14 ~
-=
12'':'&"
~
!
VAUUTED
PORCH ~~,
SUNiRM
I
I
I
.fi;]
~ """01 _
3072-2
--
b
b
DINING
l1x13
FOYER
6
~ 10 KITCHEN
~ 15'6,'0
yH
.~~
~
"-
I
~
_..
,
./
b
.~ i'
,., 4'-O~
:...
il"'''~
~"""COlS +..,:~ ,-.
II COVERED ON
!'CONC STOOP
~,
i, . ~
00 ili
I T-o' ~ S! '_ .
LQ 81
L...'_ ','
...
~ ."
kif
1;> hI I~ Y] -
._,.'" WO'_HOC JI/:; ~~~~
'I ILbJ ~ :. ~I\ CWNERS ~~~
: ~h-o ~) H BATH J f--
(/ f.-, ! _..OC~~ ~ fl ~H ~
'[l::I 0 EJ 2-1 J ~:IC ~
DEN / BR ~ 1/2 - · AUND A" .'
13,,0'8 I(>O[ -;-! MUD r L1N
~ ~'-~N11 B/C 7 ~ lL ,'-0" "-9'
.-
b \!
::r~~
~' .'
10'-8"
..'
.<"
.","
Ir-.'
"-r
9'-9'
OWNERS
SUITE
14,17'2
pROP GARAGE PLA TE5 r -0' FROM HOUSE
, GARAGE
NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE CENTER LINE
or THE AIR SPACE- MAKE FRAMING AND
MASONRY ADJI.ISTMENTS PER DETAIL THIS PAGE.
( ~MT~
JHIS ,.t,(j(
I""""
.
\0
,,!,
.
.CENT(R~~
I,
~. I....
,s~ I '
J'AlR~Aa:
~EN5ruo-: _.....
,-
FRAMING/MASONRY DETAIL
A T PARTY WALL
SCAlE: 1/2.."-0'
~
,
'"
WlC
~.
00
I~
T~ 7
l6
10'" M
~
/;!i
"--l
-
X6w~1
9' O'
10'-0'
o
o
--
X
'AH'
LAl ND I L~
M,D<~
~ )
'--I
\0 ~I
,,!, ,.
~
LA ND ~
M D r~
"
!::
":>
~ r~
11'-O~
'\.~
. ...
OWNERS ;!
BATH
"-9' --,
Ol
, Q
ALTERN A TE #2
":> WIC
'"
10'-0.
J OWN; S ~
BAT
)'.8"
---
lIN I
lIJo
r-- ..--
30,24 tJ-~ ~~
b I 2-4 4, EJ
~ , ~ =:= AUND
I
~I- I 3lm-2 BA TH >[ - ":> MUD
"w,,""
- - - - I ~ o D"cJ> 4wO
8X7 OH OR I ~-O TU8 B/C ~ 10L
I , I 16X7 OH OR ~
,
I I 1996 SQFl ~
, I
. ---..J
II ..- . .- ".- - I I 44X80 ~ ALT BATH
, - ---.. -
-- ---- I
I I g' CEILINGS TYPICAL
,
~o '0'_0"1 ~'-" 14'-0.
-< I 44'-0' j
I~ I I ~ F"" L b c::> ~ F=' L ~ f'-J
V> LINE or TURNED GARAGE I , . 0"
; -- -- - -- -' ., ..............:&....
ALTERN A TE #1
NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE CENTER LINE
OF THE AIR SPACE- MAKE FRAMING AND
MASONRY ADJUSTMENTS PER DETAIL THIS PAGE.
-
C!Nq~~~
2X6 [,1'1'.,\
(.,S~; "~I
3....IRSP...CE .....
tE~[HSlUD_ _.....
J'
-
FRAMING/MASONRY DETAIL
AT PARTY WALL
SC~: 1/2".1'-0'
12'8AR "
..- ..-
t--" 1-1-
PAMlR') , o.
1-.- ':> (4bUIS..lNO ) ..:;.;
t:! i-'
KITCHEN ~:::7.-:~
~V ' '
;-:=--
16'-0.
, .
~ 1.0 AI
I-u'~ '~
- :II
AL TERN A TEU
n ~ "'ii:l)-ll/
0-0 0 :rC
""IsH", B~,!~ ~ ~
~,
,!;UNEN
11'-6"
;::... "':;0
I 'V'.'"
I-i.=!-
AL TERNA TE
.<:
.~. .
-
8
2104 SQF~
44XSo
I. ~
i i ~
"'g
~
'"
-
10' CEILINGS TYPICAL
~[~Tj[
'IHlSp,t,C[
"fll'oJ..
13'-6"
10
'~
Ift-5"
15'-0'
\,
.a
iRfH::
r~-'
;
I
VAU~TED
PO~CH
SUN RM
I
I
i
DECK
15, 10
3O/60/3OX 72
_ HOLDHlGH
\,
,:.
H~2~
GREA T R~
2-6 2-&
rRENCH
1;-
1;:
OWNERS
SUITE
i\
3 OED
GAS
DINETTE
~ cr ed
<( 'f KITCH~ N
~ '" ""'NTAyll
,J,
15'-10' r- ~-, T-" 10'-2" 7 16'-0.
.. " ~ 'f J-o"," <<1
WIC VI ~HJ
"-e' .... b ..J
/. b 0
.~
~ ... ~ "-, P~"
~ r ; ~ 1:. ':1':'"
3'-6"
7'-6"
.......,
~ "'''
'-0 ", COVE~;~CC'
CONC STO
5'44"
~i
FOYER
5'-0'
"16" SCfnr
12.12COt.S
".
L1E~~O "'9 I~"
.:. -.J 1 2 B ,-, ':>
, 10" ~-10" ,~ '" "-0'
'-'POC 0
~ LAUND
" MUD
. 4:-0 \0 In'_50
l>k:\ IE]. I 0
so
DINING RM
13'-6"
.. ,~\:1-'
~~:;o
" 0'-8'
I 4'-0'
I
I
I
,
,
~ BR / DEN
DROP GARAGE PLATES 1'-0" FROM HOUSE
~
GARAGE
!
I
!
i
30,24
3012-3-
NCXD "'"
~ l;;'~AIlPANnoOOR- - - - - - - - - - 1
~ ....-........qo
r =~-~f~f oOOA - - 1
I I
I i I
I I
I I
I i I
I: I
I
I
I
I
: I ~I
14'-0.
I I
I
30'-0"
20'-0.
I,
F=~Af'...J
". ~.. L
44'-0'
-$
F"" L i c:::> c:::> F<:':
. ... -- ..
LINE OF TURNED GARAGE
.-
I-
o.
.::..:
r='
i
i-, ~i
110'-0'
f-;;-
""
-'-'=
7~
~i
1;-
'"
7i
~i
~
~
1;-
t:!
-
1;-
P '"
~
'-.
b
i
7i
~i
~
4'-0'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1;- I
i:. !
!
I
I
I
I
~
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"
:")
~
" CEUfGS T'fPIC.Al
-.osa:! IlfClOlilS SIltS Q'4N
..,
,.,
g
I
'"
.(";~. .
DECK
11'.. .
I '-s.
1'-11-
I
6'-11" I
"Tl-~121D1-r - i
, I i
I :
i I
I :
I I
j :
; f
.cnc,
S/'. X G'f'P ID rJRtC[]Df:
ON ALL WALLS , CtlLlNG
COMMON TD HDUSE.
Ir
it
GARAGE
.. CONC 'LDOR
StIPE TO DOORS
l~o.u~ tGt
I
I
2"-0.
~'
/'
, -.-,
~1 ~
. I ::;:;
,>11>=1
-cg
'"
~
'"
NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE CENTER LINE
OF THE AIR SPACE- MAKE FRAMING AND
MASONRY ADJUSTMENTS PER DETAIL THIS PAGE,
.......
$ ,.1
DECK
"'-0'
~'a,,"~f:
%)6 i......
",:~ " "
BElv.(EHSlUO .....
WAUS
J'
.s:.'~
~ED"fi )
THlSPAC[
'"
.!.
OWNERS
SUITE
FRAMINGjl.tASONRY DETAIL
A T PARTY WALL
SCAl.!:1/2".".O.
f1
l/llINtH "-,'
Q 10'-'" (ll
\ J OWNER' "'"'
'AlM(D(" BATH 0 ~
~ ~....-
V 13'-2~
/\ 1'- "'>WIC
;::::::=: ~,-..J- '
Do(/ T >- f-o"
4 i~l ~i' '-7"
~ W1C '-j! J~
/~~
,'- " ,'-," ~
^
~O[
",j
lo:'
':!:
',,",",
,,'S
~
Il~
J
OWNER
BATH
)
Al TERNA TE #1 ....
I ,!,
Q 0 ~
o WVANlTY
(l 1/2""~7-i '+=
;7 ~ ~
II "
Z ::<'~,~ ITiJ\j (1110.05
'''.'
B'
/j, JZ . ~AUND
':!: ~
...-- 13'-" , ~ UD RM
.~ " ~ ..~
'f OWNER
'" BATH
~2
Q Q I ",j 2-6
!C
'-
ALTERN A TE #2
7 "
-
o
1655 SQ Ft
ao.{gO'~X12
~~
9'-0
--
I
,,'L."
,-.
:
I
I
I
I
I
VAULT~D
GREA~ RM ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
. I
I 1'-4"
-- _______J___ --=k
10' OHTRICCOt.s
lSllll TIll( orm
,,",Co.
~ 0
!;l ,
l:!
DININ(
.' " 11'_64
110] IO'BAR
/;J ,- . -.. -
~ D':<~'
~~
~
~ .9 L- l:! 1<i''1
\1! KITCHEN !~~
Ii!
-
5'-4" PANTRY 12'-4"
=
.1:.f....
I: NOCK
1:'
~ ~~
FOYER '''I-
2-6 /l
::'" ~ ~
~"/~r l"
,
..
zrn-z
HOl1)~'"
6'-1'
DEN
COVERED ~
iSTOOP.... ..
~i -i,
~~Cl)S
ro
'"-,"
2'-6"
~
i:
GARAGE
22,24
DROP GARAGE PLATES 1'-0' F OM HOUSE
29X86
-
10' CEILINGS TYPICAL
r- ~...:-
~~~1ClIt
F=L ~I'-...J
I
.......
'l'
F L c::::> c::::> ~
~ .........41-.. ,. 0"
- --,
29'-0
22'-0-
1 7'-0"
/
"
<j- rr~bJOx~ tN' IID.OW q. ....... ~caO': 72
DECK .. l!j~
I "'-'" ... 0"-'" 'l' '"
13'-'- 15'-6"
;, 29'-0. . ,.'- /
- >>eo-, ~;'~ '-
I;>
"
BD~M
,.r:"~ :;= 0
W1C, llil
[)\.. ' ~: ~~
BAn ~ 2-4 'V
I~ 0 rP-i
,~i r=, I'fco : "-,,
OPEN TO
GREA T RM
RAIIJHC 15'-'-
LOFT
15'-10.
'"
o TRelloCuT
T
~ LC::>-F-T PL~N
'-1' 889 SO FT includes open area
n
~
~OTE: ALL DlMENSlONS ARE TO THE CENTER LINE
bi' THE AIR SPACE- MAKE FRAMING ANO
l.4ASONRY AD.AJSTMENTS PER DETAIL THIS PAGE,
'~~.~
2XI :1'1'.,\
(,,~~ I~I
3"" SPAa: .....
1tt'W[[N STUO_ ......
."', \/"'3'
~("- . .
FRAMING/MASONRY DETAIL
AT PARTY WALL
SCALE: 1!2..,'-ft
.-
02
(1655 SO F
29x6e
; 13
i i ~
'9
-<
%
~
OJ'
-
10' CEILINGS TYPICAL
., /~.._., 0-0..
._.llIIlIW,
~~~
OWN RS YO ~
BA H '"
'"
!:! Ii! L-
""IT 0'" I ,'_"
o
.r
o
I~) ~
.~ ~J"; ,'-
W1C ~ il=
,I ALTERN A TE #1
1
.~!!~_.
r---
2-0
W1q ~ ~ 2-4 ~ ~
"~~I'-JI y
.,_.l2-4 ~_,' C.:l
~...
"'..
_ . LAN. ttAljI
~
Er
--=-
o
..'
o
LI
,
AL TERNA TE #2 I
",
t
,-,
'"
J[
SUlXTq,
1MS PAG(
'-0
""'"
'"
~ OWNERS
SUITE
.~
II- ;
~= ~
;!
II
'~--' ~G1-
l1'. ....,,"'-'
0<'-- ...~
~~~
o ~ OWNERS """
a.....:o' BA TH
""\ "-,, ~-"
~ . g
'"
1.0\1I. ~]
'"
'"
~ W1C ;r,
GREA T RM
'"
~
~j,~-=--:-=~:":-.= =-
1O'~lRXC"S
le)(I6TRI(~
'"
is
"
I
'1- '
,.'-
I;>
~
22.24
DROP GARAGE PLA TES l' -0" ROM HOUSE
GARAGE
'-0"
r- - - - -~ I
I .~~%'''. I
I I
IiJ
T
t I;>
ij ~ .:.
I DININ -
10"-1.
10' StURM: C 5
... 8['" ; be POST W 10. SAIl
-~.i:lil<~= -
'/ -< ~
~ >>
loll _
~ FOYER ~~"l.-
,-, ~:'" ~
~o/j~ ~
DEN COVERED I;>
i STOOP.... ...
~a ~
IV 0 I
O~o
1/2 B r(.111
::7~
tl~\j 10 -
· T
-;- ... AUND
_ UD RM I J
~~ I~
r\1~1~0 /1
lJ 1.1 (le' II
,-,";::
...
,"
"-0'
OR
KITCHE
I_Ii
PNlTIlY
~
g
'"
i JlJ
11'-10.
NOC K
I;>
...
2472.2
....."'"
"-I-
f:ti.
1-6'
7'-0'
~~,,~.~ - _:__..'._.....A.........:.....,.._ _..:...o~~__'. - .
"n.. 'n' .ur.....
~ . ~
~u
~.;,~
o
. u
HOMES
I ~ (,--., 1.:::1 ~\' v, :.: . ~~~ ,-
'1m ~;::t I \v ...-J I
IIi' ?0 - ..1\_: .:.:::
Ill::? -~--
d LJ I
II \\ \ JAM' 2 2001
I! ! \ \ I ~ .\
IU u'-
I J
January 11, 2001
Brief Description of Proposed Property
Regal Crest
Regal Crest is going to be a townhome development of 78 units completed in two phases.
There will be 33 units in the first phase and 45 units in the second phase. The buildings will
consist of two unit, three unit and four unit buildings, with foundation sizes ranging from
approximately 1600 to 2100 square feet in size. The majority of the units will be rambler units
with walkout basements, but we are developing a story and a half unit for the center units. All
end units are being designed with 3 car garages and we have incorporated turned garages on
some of the lots to increase the curb appeal of the project. All of the buildings will be owner
occupied and there will be a master homeowners association to take care of all the unit
maintenance and lawn care. The units will be priced from about $250,000.00 to over
$400,000.00 for the final sales price. We are still finalizing the unit plans and elevations, but I
have attached some preliminary plans and elevations for you to look at. I have also attached a
copy of our preliminary unit landscape plan and development landscape plan.
If you have any questions please give me a call or you may call our engineer Peter Knaeble.
Darin Pavek 952-469-6900
Peter Knaeble 612-593-9325
Thank you;
~ f2w(
Darin Pavek
7920 Lakeville Boulevard Lakeville MN 55044
(612) 469-6900 office (612) 469-6910 fax
Toll Free 1-877-469-6900
www.colle1!ecitvhomes.com
...u.._.,_.....~..~_.....;...-'......~. __. _, ._..:...._~.........:_,.._ ._... .,.""..._.~....-.__
r......;
'~
February 2, 2000
rr:\\, : S (~ I=; n ':\-:~::-:I~:-:-TI'"
I,'. " '--"1 l~ L; .\. ,i._ " .',
II " 1 . ---:::;, -.......-... ...:...-: .: \.-,' '. _1 .: ..
" If' _I. .:
'I L; I ,1, :
Il~' ;,1 Ii
'II~\~\ FEB - 2 2001 ii/II
. \ IIV)
, a661 llenWOOd Ave.
Minneapolis. Minnesota 55422
Phone: 763-593-9325
Fax: 763-512-0717
. TERRA ENGINEERING, INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERING. LAND PLANNING . CONSULTING
Jane Kansier
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Re: Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Plat Application
Regal Crest (78 Unit Townhouse Project)
TE #00-108
Dear Ms. Kansier:
Per our meeting with the City Staff yesterday, we are submitting the attached revised'
Preliminary Plat (She~ 1; 6 full size;' 6-11x17) for your review. The Preliminary Plat was
revised per the written comments from the Planning Department. The written comments
from the Engineering Department (dated 2/2/01) were also reviewed and are mainly issues
that can be incorporated into our final construction plans.
Per the Planning Staff comments we have the following responses:
* The revised open space areas and calculations are shown on the plan and have
been revised to exclude the existing areas of 20%+ slopes. The total open space shown is
141,570 sf, which is 303% more than required by the City zoning ordinance.
* The decks and porches are shown on our site plan and on the submitted building
plans. All building units will meet the City's required minimum setback requirements,
including the proposed decks and porches.
* All proposed buildings do meet the minimum setback between buildings of 20 feet.
The proposed overhang of the units will not exceed two feet.
* The plan does show the required 30' setback from the 1 DO-year flood elevation of
wetlands and the NURP pond. All proposed buildings exceed this 30' setback.
* We have calculated the Ground Floor Area Ratio at 0.19 which is 37% less than
the maximum allowable ratio of 0.30.
* A revised Landscape Plan was submitted to you yesterday at our meeting. This
plan should meet all landscaping requirements of the City ordinance. Our revised tree
replacement calculations have been previously submitted per you request.
* Per the suggestion of the City Staff, the attached plan has now eliminated Outlot
A, which was originally planned to be used for future development.
, . .....-_~--_.- ..~_.,. -~--'- -"'~' -' .,.- --.'-- '-- .-.--- . -- - .' .-... - - .-'~-"'----'-'
. . ~ --. ...; "_'. ~._ ~ ~___ - 0-'._"'" ______,_-~- _ _
....
* The parking stalls located on the public rights-of-way were elimimitedper our
discussion. As indicated on the plan, our parking calculations show 350 parking areas
(excluding garages) which is approximately 4.5 parking areas per unit. This figure is 2.2
times the required number of 2. 0 parking areas per unit.
* We looked at the issued of the number of driveway openings. As we discussed our
59 driveway openings will still allow approximately 144 on-street parking areas. Based on
approximately 2400 feet of street, the average driveway spacing is 81 feet, which is similar
to the driveway spacing for a single family development. We therefore do not consider
the number of driveway openings shown to be a significant issue.
* We have ordered survey information of the downstream off-site drainage swale per
our discussion with the City Engineer. The Developer is contacting this neighbor to the
south to see about acquiring a drainage easement over this existing swale. The
Developer's attorney is also reviewing the legal aspects of this issue. ,
* The wetland calculations shown on our plan have been updated per our discussion.
These calculations show that our wetland mitigation will exceed the State and Watershed
requirements by 30%. All mitigation areas will be designed to comply with State and
Watershed regulations and standards.
* Per the 1/2/01 letter from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, we
believe that our stormwater routing and management is being handled appropriately. One
hundred percent of the proposed street runoff will be routed to and treated by our NURP
pond. Based on our calculations,.the proposed surface drainage going off-site to the
northeast is being reduced from 2.31 acres to 0.76 acres (a 67% area reduction). We
therefore do not expect any adverse stormwater or erosion issues off-site.
We believe that this project has addressed the City's criteria for cluster housing per the
zoning' ordinance:
* A significant area of natural open space has been preserved as shown on our site
plan. The calculated area of natural open space of 3 .25 acres exceeds the zoning
requirement by over 300%. This natural open space area will provide a significant unique
site amenity, will preserve a large contiguous natural wooded area, will allow a beautiful
quiet area for project residents to explore on the proposed trail, and will help protect the
natural environment of Wetland #2.
* The actual amount of common areas and open space will be approximately 14.1
acres, which is over 56% of the total site. These large common areas will provide
permanent significant green views and a. sense of openness to this project and to the
surrounding areas.
* The large number of trees to be planted for landscaping and reforestation will also
provide a considerable amenity to the residents of this site and to the City.
* The natural wooded open space areas can be permanently retained and protected
through the use of conservation easements.
* The clustered homes will not only be aesthetically pleasing, but will allow the City
to meet the important goal of providing a variety of housing types and styles for City
residents.
-'.- . . ----...'--~<- _. -;..,-~...""'.......--"'-:--.-..---- .~-,-~ _:to..:_____ -:-.-.....-...... ._..J- -- ~.....-- ,....-.......- ...... -..-.' ""-'J"'.' - -- ~ -..;.."' - .." -'.
"
Again we are requesting a Conditional Use Permit for R-l Low Density Residential
Cluster Housing and Preliminary Plat approval for this project. We are not requesting a
rezoning for this property, as the property is currently appropriately zoned R-l Low'
Density Residential. We understand that thi~project will be scheduled for the 2/12/01
Planning Commission meeting and the 3/5101 City Council meeting. We have also
scheduled a neighborhood meeting for 2/7101 at the Prior Lake Library. Per our
discussion, we are now planning on presenting this project informally to the City Council
on 2120/01 at 7:00 pm.
We believe that this project meets the City's standards for approval ofa Conditional Use
Permit. 'This project will be a valuable addition not only to this neighborhood, but to the
entire City of Prior Lake. If you have any questions, or need additional information,
please call.
Sincerely,
fJ; 1JlA '
Peter J. Knaeble ,
TERRA ENGINEERING, INC.
CC: Don and Darin Pavek, College City Homes (wi encl.)
Russell Streefland, attorney (wi encl.)
Steve Nelson, Bridgeland Development (wi encl.)
Michael N. Felix
10761 Smetana Rd. Ste.312
Minnetonka, Mn. 55343
Irm&@rnD~~rRi
lfr! .3 I m J~I
Ms. Jane Kansier
City of Prior Lake, Mn
16200 Eagle Cr. Dr.
Prior Lake Mn. 55372
1-29-2001
Re - Proposed Regal Crest Development
Ms. Kansier;
I have included, for your consideration, some comments regarding the above
referenced proposed development.
The entrance road and its slope destroys a wetland which has been there for
more than my lifetime.
Instead of fronting development on the wetland to the east, which would seem
the most obvious planning scheme for the site, this development fills that same
depression and wetland to create an entrance to the site. Because the wetland is
much lower than Co. # 21, the amount of fill required destroys the wetland.
The wetland delineation itself is suspect and should be checked by an unbiased
consultant. There is likely more wetland than shown
Access to this site should occur at Lords Street and/ or from County # 82 to the
south. This plan substitutes a short term, environmentally destructive solution
for a long-term effective traffic plan.
The appropriate access and traffic flow to and through this site would render
mitigation of wetland destruction totally unnecessary.
The developer indicates a turnaround for the street, which supposedly would
eventually hook up with Lords Street. However there is presently no city plan for
the extension of this street. You know perfectly well that the people who
purchase homes along that street will not want the connection made; thus
isolating the exceptions.
The city should not be rushed into this plan simply due to the developers
pecuniary requirements.
The city is at fault for not having an appropriate long-term plan for traffic in the
area and implementing it, as development occurs. Also of not making the
developer aware of these considerations so that the developer could include
them in his cost analysis.
In this case the developer has apparently paid too much for the land and then
substituted the cheapest provision for access, no matter the environmental
impact, or long term planning for the area.
Development of this access, per the plan, puts an unattractive street directly to
the south of mine and other property owners, degrading the aesthetics of the
vtew.
Thank you for your consideration of these suggestions and comments. I am;
Sincerely, ~~~
Michael N. FelixU '-
Shakopee Mdewakanton
Sioux Community
OFFICERS
Stanley R. Crooks
Chairman
2330 SIOUX TRAIL NW - PRIOR LAKE. MINNESOTA 55372
TRIBAL OFFICE: 952-445-8900 - FAX: 952-445-8906
Glynn A. Crooks
Vice Chairman
Lori K. Crowchild
SecretarylTreasurer
29 January 2001
Ms. Jane Kansier, Planner
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
Irm f'2 1::' -.:J
! , t (_. ; i"~:'-' ,.
,i i'l LC:;'~ is 0 W rg ~I'\
'" . ' - II)')
'I ~i .IAN 2 9 200l 1,'1111'
U Ui JJJ
RE: Comments on Regal Crest CUP and Preliminary PIa
Dear Ms. Kansier:
The following constitutes the comments ofthe Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community (SMSC) on the application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and
preliminary plat for Regal Crest. The SMSC, besides being an adjacent land owner, is a
sovereign government with reservation lands abutting the proposed development. Tribal
lands are not in private ownership but are under the direct jurisdiction of the Tribal
Government. They are subject to tribal and federal regulatory jurisdiction. This includes
any negative impacts that may arise off the tribal lands but travel onto them. Comments
in this letter are the official comments of the SMSC Tribal Government.
Wetlands
The wetland impact is incorrectly calculated. The applicant does not receive the .05 acre
de minimus credit because the total impacts exceed 2,000 square feet. This change
contained in a year 2000 amendment to Minnesota Rule 8420. This brings the total
impact to .52 acres. At a 2: 1 mitigation the mandatory mitigation is 1.04 acres. The
proposed New Wetland Credit is .54 acres. The SMSC feels that this should be increased
to at least .60 acres to insure creation of at least .52 acres of new wetland.
Any new wetland must meet all ofthe criteria in Minnesota Rule 8420.0550, Subpart 2.
This requires that the wetland created have an irregul~ edge to create points and bays
(see Minnesota Rule 8420.0550, Subpart 2, H). The design provided does not meet this
criterion. The new wetland must also have an irregular bottom (see Minnesota Rule
8420.0550, Subpart 2, F). The design provided does not meet this criterion. There was
no statement of plans to seed or plant in the wetland area. If such seeding or planting is
taking place, the applicant should provide plans including the seed mix or plant types.
Under Minnesota Rule 8420.0550, Subpart 2, C the seed and plants should be oflocal
wetland origin.
There appears to be an unmitigated impact on the wetland located in the southwestern
comer of the property. The utility plan indicates that all streets will drain to the ponding
.
. -, . - .' ~ . . -. - ,-...
! -, ....
area. It appears, however, that a significant amount of impervious surface will drain into
the above mentioned wetland without treatment of any kind.
Grading
Given the scale of the maps provided it is difficult to evaluate potential impacts from
grading. The overall impact on all neighboring properties, particularly that of the SMSC,
appears negative. There appears to be potential for severe erosion during construction
and significant long term impacts on neighboring properties. A large part of the impact
from grading operations relates to the attempt to maximize the number of units on the
available land without considering alternative locations. To accomplish this objective
there is significant proposed berming and grading along the boundaries of the subject
property. This has the result of altering the neighboring properties' character. It also has
significant affect on surface water runoff as discussed below.
Storm water
Insufficient thought and planning have been given to the routing and management of
stormwater. The streets are piped to a pond. The excess stormwater generated by the
remaining impervious area is, apparently, considered as surface runoff. This is
exacerbated by the large footprint and geographic concentration of the proposed units.
There are two specific areas of the project where this creates problems: 1) the northern
edge where the project abuts tribal lands; and 2) the southwestern comer where a
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act jurisdiction wetland is located.
On the northern edge there is an apparent potential for significant runoff being channeled
onto and across tribal lands. In one location, just north of the northeastern most comer of
the subject parcel, it appears that the stormwater may flow directly into an existing
residential lot. This situation is unacceptable. The applicant should provide a means for
managing the runoff created by the impermeable surface within the bounds of the subject
parcel.
lfthe applicant cannot contain stormwater within the bounds of the subject parcel the
applicant will have to apply for an NPDES permit. Any NPDES permit for discharge
onto tribal lands will probably be issued by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5. Alternatively, this NPDES permit may be issued by the MPCA in
consultation with the EP A and the SMSC as the receiving jurisdiction.
The wetland in the southwestern corner of the subject parcel will receive untreated runoff
from the impermeable surface located to the north and east. The units located south and
west of the street all drain directly into this wetland. This should require a NPDES
permit from the MPCA.
Both of the above problems could be eliminated by redesigning the project to retain the
wood lot as the open space and relocating the streets to provide a stormwater intercept
between the housing units and the wetland. The area between the street and the wetland
could be planted in native grasses to provide a buffer.
. .'~"'~"~'-_."_'_"""-'"'' ~ ....w...._._..~ .......,~-.~.....'.f .
It is difficult to judge from the plans provided, but the ponding does not appear
appropriately sized for the potential runoff This is probably due to the fact that the pond
only treats street runoff and all other runoff drains across the surface without treatment.
Full evaluation of the adequacy of sizing and design for the ponding is impossible using
the maps provided. They are unclear, of an irregular scale and generally do not provide
adequate legible information. Additional comments on this area will likely be provided
after review of detailed plans.
Deforestation and general ecosystem impacts
Development planning did not adequately consider the existing environment. The
northern portion of the subject parcel contains a remnant of the Big Woods-
Maple/Basswood type forest that once covered a large percentage of northern Scott
County. Many of the trees in this area are old growth. They provide significant wildlife
habitat, stabilize the soil and afford a host of indirect environmental benefits. Removal
of these trees will significantly impact the local ecosystem.
The functions and values of this wood lot cannot be replaced by planting boulevard trees
and shrubbery, especially where many of the planted species are not native to North
America, let alone Minnesota. The existing forest community will be destroyed forever.
The distributed nature of the planting, the choice of species and the immature nature of
the plants precludes any development of a natural community around the new trees. Even
the passing oftime and maturing of the new trees will not remedy this problem. This is a
permanent and significant alteration of an ecotype that is growing increasingly rare. .
This total destruction of the wood lot is not absolutely necessary. To meet the City
imposed density requirements the project requires open space. Open space does not
require a large open area of grass or turf. Preserving a mixture of grass areas and wooded
lands increases the environmental and aesthetic benefit of urban open space. When
native grass and wooded open space are linked in corridors it provides a texture to the
urban environment that preserves a small sense of the natural environment.
The project could be redesigned to preserve the wood lot and protect the wetland.
Roadways could be located between the housing units and the wetland. Doing so
intercepts the stormwater and provides an opportunity for treatment. The area between
the street and the wetland could be seeded in native grass as a buffer for road salt. The
entire set of housing units could then be shifted to the south and west along the realigned
street. The existing wood lot would then become the "open space". The net result would
be the same approximate number of units, reduced runoff into the wetland and
preservation of a living resource.
Light, view, aesthetic and human environmental impacts
As designed, the development significantly impacts the view, light and privacy of the
SMSC residential areas. Due to the size and location ofthe planned units, residents will
lose significant amounts of sunlight during certain seasons. They will also most directly
suffer the loss of the environmental buffering affects of the destroyed wood lot.
'---~ -- . .. - ------
Expected affects on SMSC residents are broad in nature. The units planned along the
northern edge of the subject parcel will obstruct low angle sunlight during the winter
months. The loss of the trees will increase the amount of wind that directly impacts these
residents. Daily temperature and humidity.ranges will increase in all seasons. There will
be a significant decrease in aesthetic quality of their homes.
The majority of the light, view, aesthetic and human environment impacts could be
ameliorated by redesigning the development. Leaving the wooded area intact removes
the majority of the impacts. It would be very difficult to mitigate impacts if the
development is built as currently designed. There is little or no room for screening or
other methods of impact abatement.
Summary
Many of the above stated impacts are avoidable. The design, as submitted by the
applicant, appears to be unimaginative and limited to maximizing housing units at the
lowest cost. There was little consideration given to impacts on the neighbors or the
environment. Regulatory issues, where they are addressed, are given the minimum of
attention required by law. Based on the foregoing, the SMSC respectfully requests the
City deny the CUP until significant changes are made to the development proposal.
Sincerely,
A4- I!i ~ CL.~
GIU- A. Crooks
Vice-Chairman
....,
\.. ~~.
'a
DATE: February 2, 2001
TO: Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator
FROM: Lani Leichty, Water Resources Coordinator
RE: Regal Crest (Project #01-34)
The Engineering Department has reviewed the preliminary plans for the subject project
and we have the following comments:
1. Submit a wetland replacement application.
2. Provide a grading plan at a scale 1" = 50' or larger.
3. Provide a map showing existing drainage conditions. (Same scale as proposed
conditions.)
4. Show the 1 OO-year HWL for wetland #1.
5. Storm calculations should be provided for 2, 10 & 100 year-24 hour event storms, for
both existing and proposed conditions (exclude the 1-year event).
6. The design storm runoff for sizing the NURP pond for 32% impervious area and
impervious CN = 61 is 0.93 inches of runoff. Resize the NURP pond accordingly.
7. Provide an emergency overflow from wetland #1 such that adjacent units are 2'
above the EOF, or provide a secondary outlet pipe under the entrance road with an
inlet elevation of 938.5.
8. Provide an access road to the NURP pond for maintenance purposes with a slope
:S 8% I with a width of 1 0'.
9. Maximum slope of grading in maintained areas is 4:1.
10. On street 'A', use DIP - Class 52 sewer pipe for depths ~ 26'.
11. All of the manholes on street 'A' (page 6) are labeled as Manhole 8.
12. Show the plan view of the utilities on the plan/profile sheets.
13. A drop manhole will be required for Manhole 10.
14. Obtain temporary construction easements where off-site grading is occurring.
15. Show hydrant spacing on the utility plans, and show the utility lines as different line
types.
G:\PROJECTS\200 I \34regalcrest\REVIEW I.DOC
.~.,~ :.......::~.. -,.....".. ....."... ........ - _... ':-."--r' :_--:-.;......:....~:......_- --- -.. . - .- ~_..._..---~---.........................-_-._,,- .'...... - . '.' --.. -'.' -- - ..,,--. .........:,...:..,;,."..--....- ..
,~
','
16. The street grade shall not exceed 2.00% for the first 100' approaching the
intersection with C.R. 21.
17. Design the vertical curves according to the Prior Lake Design Manual.
(Sag: K= 36 for 30 mph, Crest: K = 30 fof30 mph)
18. Use SDR 26 pipe for 8" sewer for depths between 16' -26' (street '8').
19. Refer to the Prior Lake Design Manual for preparation of plans and specifications.
20. Look at alternative ways of connecting to the existing sanitary sewer.
2
SCOTT COUNTY
PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST
JORDAN, MN 55352-9339
(952) 4Q6-8346
Ilml">) !];@@ 0\\17 ~~.G'.)
I~l ~ ...'::1 ., I
I Ii:
! I !'
.( lilli!
\,/ FEB-52001 Ill/II
UI IlY
BRADLEY J. LARSON
PUBLIC WORKS DlRECTORJ
COUNTY HIGHWAY ENGINEER
Fax: (952) 496-8365
January 30, 2001
Jane Kansier
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Preliminary Plat, Regal Crest
CSAH 21- North ofCSAH 82
Dear Jane:
We have reviewed the preliminary plat as it relates to Highway Department issues and
offer the following comments or concerns:
. A right turn lane, designed to County standards, shall be required on CSAH 21 at the
proposed Fairway Heights Trail.
. All existing field accesses or driveways to the property along CSAH 21 shall be
completely removed from the County right-of-way and graded to match in.
. Any change in drainage entering the County right-of-way shall require detailed
drainage calculations to be submitted to the County Engineer for review and
approval.
. An access permit for Fairway Heights Trail shall be required.
. No berming, landscaping, ponding, or signing shall be allowed in the County right-of-
way.
. A utility permit shall be required for any work within the County right-of-way.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please feel free to
contact me.
Sincerely,
",,/,,-?
~/~-
t.-.- "7
Craig Jenson
Transportation Planner
.
An Equal Opportunity/Safety Aware Employer
- ...~
Fax:
Jane Kansier, DRC Coordinator
City of Prior Lake
447-424S
Fax to:
From:
Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District
Jim Eggen, District Technician
Date:
Febroary 6,2001
Comments on: Regal Crest Preliminary Plat & ConditiODal Use Permit
Depending on when PLSL WD receives the required pennit application, this
project will be considered under the existing roles or the new roles currently
being considered by the Board of Managers.
Under the new rules, modifications to the plans will be required to
accommodate such items as nmoff, infiltration on site, and dedication of
buffers/conservation easements. District review and permitting will have to
be completed prior to approval of the preliminary plat.
Whether under the existing roles or the new rules, the District must receive a
permit application and a District permit must be issued b,efore construction
may begin. When a complete application is received, the District will carry
out a full review of the project with respect to District rules.
With only a curso,ty review done at this time, District staff are concerned
with the storm water management plan shown on sheet 3 and the potential
for offsite drainage impacts to the property/drainageways to the south of the
proposed stormwater outfall. With respect to the proposed grades, it appears
that drainage from the site would be diverted to the outfall at the southeast
end of the site rather than being directed along the historic drainage
path/topography. The historic drainage pattern for the west end of the site is
to the southwest comer.a
7 '..l I I I C' . n ~I
n:n.lC: ).I':lll/M lC: l,.l W,.lC7:i7 Inn? '<1m_--,O~-L_
Page 2
Regal Crest, 2/6/01
In addition, staff contemplates recommending the following conditions for
the Managers' consideration if this activity comes before the Board under
the existing roles:
1) That roof drains be directed to pervious areas to promote infiltration and
not be dis,barged to or allowed to reach impervious areas such as paved
swfaces, drainageways or, ultimately, stormwater collection systems.
2) That vehicle parking be prohibited on lots during construction, except
on driveways and roads,
3) That compacted soils be mitigated prior to seeding.
f?~
llOEROFmCEMEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
PLANNING/ENGINEERING
Ralph Teschner, Finance Director
REGAL CRESTADDITION - Preliminary
(assessment/fee review)
January 23, 2001
A 26 acre parcel comprising PIN #25 934 005 0 is proposed to be developed as Regal Crest. This
area has received no prior assessments for City municipal utilities.
Since utilities are available to the property site, the cost for the extension of services internally
will be the responsibility of the developer. In addition to these improvement costs, the
subdivision will be subject to the following City charges:
Collector Street Fee
Stormwater Management Fee
Trunk Sewer & Water Fee
Lateral Sewer &. Water Charge
$ 1500.00/acre
$2943.00/acre
$3500.00/acre
150' @ $60.00/ff
The application of applicable City. development charges would generate the following costs to_
the developer based upo~ a net lot area'calculation of23.81 acres of townhouse units as provided
within the site data summary sheet of the preliminary plat description:
Collector Street Fee:
23.81 acres @ $1500.00/ac = $35,715.00
Storm Water Mana2ement Fee:
23.81 acres @ $2943/ac = $70,073.00
Trunk Sewer & Water Char2e:
23.81 acres @ $3500.00/ac = $83,335.00
Lateral Sewer & Water Chare;e:
150' @ $60.00/ff= $9,000.00
These charges represent an approximate cost of $2,540.00 per lot for the 78 proposed townhouse
units within Regal Crest. Assuming the initial net lot area of the preliminary plat does not
change, the above referenced storm water, collector street, trunk and lateral sewer and water
charges would be determined and collected within the context of a developer's agreement for the
construction of utility improvements at the time of final plat approval.
There are no other outstanding special assessments currently certified against the property. Also,
the tax status of the property is current with no outstanding delinquencies.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
H:\SPLITSlRegalcrest.doc
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PLANNING REPORT
SA
CONSIDER RESOLUTION 01-003PC APPROVING A
VARIANCE TO THE MAXIMUM BUILDING WALL
LENGTH TO BUILDING HEIGHT FOR THE NEW
ADDITION TO ST. MICHAEL'S SCHOOL IN THE R-2
DISTRICT (Case File #00-086)
16280 DULUTH AVENUE
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
YES X NO
FEBRUARY 12, 2001
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 16, 2001, to
consider a variance request by St. Michael's parish to allow the construction of
an addition to the existing school building on the property located 16280 Duluth
Avenue. After reviewing the applicants' proposal with respect to the variance
hardship criteria, the Planning Commission directed staff to draft a resolution
approving the requested variance.
The following variance is approved in Resolution 01-003PC:
1. A variance to permit a structure with a building wall length to building
height ratio of 5.46:1 rather than the maximum ratio of 4:1 (City Code
Section 1107.2202, ~8,b).
RECOMMENDATION:
The attached resolution is consistent with the direction provided by the Planning
Commission. The Planning Staff therefore recommends approval of Resolution
01-003PC approving a variance to the maximum building height to building
length ratio as proposed in Exhibit A.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve Resolution 01-003PC.
2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff recommends Alternative #1 .
A motion and second adopting Resolution 01-003PC approving a variance to the
maximum building wall length to building height ratio.
L:\OOFILES\OOV AR\OO-086\OO-086pc2.DOC
Page 2
RESOLUTION Ol-003PC
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE MAXIMUM BUILDING WALL
LENGTH TO HEIGHT RATIO
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. The Parish of St. Michael has applied for a variance from the Zoning Ordinance in order to
permit the construction of an addition to the existing St. Michael's school on property
located in the R-2 (Low to Medium Density Residential) District at the following location, to
wit;
16280 Duluth Avenue SE, legally described as follows:
Lots 1,2,3,4,5,23,24,25,26,27 and 28, Block 1, "WESTSIDE ADDITION TO
PRIOR LAKE", Scott County, Minnesota, together with the east 15.00 feet of Lot 6,
Block 1, of said plat.
Also together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of
Section 2, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the east line of said Southeast Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter and the center line of Main Street (extended westward) of the
Village of Prior Lake; thence south along said east line a distance of371.0 feet to the
center line of Pleasant Avenue (extended westward) per the plat of CATES'
ADDITION TO PRIOR LAKE; thence Westerly along center line of Pleasant
Avenue extended a distance of 183.00 feet to the easterly line of the plat of
WESTS IDE ADDITION TO PRIOR LAKE"; thence north parallel along said east
line a distance of 389.50 feet; thence east parallel to Pleasant Avenue, a distance of
183.0 feet to said east line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence
south a distance of 18.5 feet to the point of beginning.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in Case
File #00-086 and held hearings thereon on January 16,2001.
3. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the health,
safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light
and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property values in the
surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on the Comprehensive Plan.
1:\OOfiles\OOvar\OO-086\res OI-003pc.doc 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
;
4. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, the proposed,
variance will not unreasonably impact the character of the existing neighborhood and in any
other respect be contrary to the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
5. The existing lot is smaller than the average elementary school site. The school has existed
on this lot for several years. The location of the addition will not impact the adjacent
properties, and can be reasonably screened through the use of landscaping.
6. There is justifiable hardship caused by the existing lot area. This lot is smaller than the
average elementary school site by today's standards.
7. The granting of the Variance will not serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is
necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship.
8. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant. The variance will not serve merely as a convenience to the
applicant, and is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship.
9. The contents of Planning Case #00-086 are hereby entered into and made a part of the public
record and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the following
variance for an addition to the existing school building (as shown in attached Exhibit A):
1. A variance to permit a structure with a building wall length to building height ratio of 5.46: 1
rather than the maximum ratio of 4: 1 (City Code Section 1107.2202, 98,b).
The variance is subject to the following conditions:
1. This variance requirement will be eliminated with any future additions to the school.
2. The applicant must obtain all necessary permits and approvals prior to construction on the
site.
3. The resolution approving the variance must be recorded and proof of recording submitted to
the Planning Department within 60 days. An Assent Form must be signed and, pursuant to
Section 1108.400 of the City Code, the variance will be null and void if the necessary
permits are not obtained for the proposed structure within one year after adoption of this.
resolution.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on February 12,2001.
Thomas E. V onhof, Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
1:\OOfiles\OOvar\OO-086\res Ol-003pc.doc
2
EXHIBIT A
.
.,
.
'i _i
. :. j
I
~
"
..
-:- .1
--:::-l
',i \"'"..
i \ .
-: - ~ 1;1 Ii>, !
! : IiI' II :
. : I!! ' I. .
- ~ -. Iq' ! I
: p, .'
:.,.... ~ I
---= ~ .~i,--g \ '
,
~
'!
~
!,
If) ,-- -.~
1II1 ,"
!1I1.-> .,
. -,.-
n\(
(".)1
,-
C'.
:<I'
};.. !
::->
C) .
.
i
I __~
-------..r-'.. II i-.!I'
I :. "'''1 :'"r ." ~; 1
...: "i '~;: \ .
. l - ,.".....,. I
I , . ' I I ~
, \ '; 1.31
\ -r: ;1\ ~: ::'0 I
L-, <...,." -0 0 H I I
. " -'-"I-.:::J I j
\ ...: I I ;1 I I
\ .~: II 'i] y-.~~ ~'~!,~<I~i ,I,'-W/I+/'I ~mt~{~ I
\ ' di,/I'!(}O II . - - I
: if Ir~
\ I: ~\\ I ! 0 II :-.1 I
\1",\I~I. I
, !! .,' . I! .11 : I J..I I
\ I ::.'~~,J I1II .o'~_.~ Y-._-,- 0 I:
, -:1t-.-.' :
ji I '; I-~r~~ 0 ~o . 0 0 0 0 ~ I . @)/
---0(, .t. ,';~.. -<<_ .__ "<__ C"!\,~. J"oeL~ ~ I,' I i
._. ._< ,._ 1-~_;_--____~-,~:"'::... --<<---.----<<D~jLuril<--~~V[N,ji:-------<<-.-.----<<---.---i' : !
;'. c_____ 1. ':.
..~..."\-~~ ;~~i :~5'-"~ '.u n. _~----.'~_:_~~;;~;~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~;~~~~~~: -~-:~~~:-~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~:~)--~~t-r-.i
\ :. ~{.~ :: ~
~->,J. l~" ". il :
~ 1 ! 6 ~t l! i
~ " :
I
I
'\::,,::
~
A
{\
\
L I
?J
Ill;;ij
\.;i>
':;iil
.::1
.-,
tll' .-
IiI \ \ \ I \ \ I
II UI(lij ~
UlM r:
iiUI ~ I
II, fi=I
i (')t
;: fD I
! a!
D. ~-!l!
: . j;j
~I; U ~~
=
!~ (~
- :l:l
~~
m
~
'"l
~
.-._,'
,. ;,
, ~ ~,~
!::; I
! ~ I
~=:
z
c
~
I ~";:'
: III.: :.
I !ij
"l"'ll
.m
, :l:l
~=:
z
c
~
rrr
; ~ @
I Liiil
... =
. : :; ~
I,.._.::~
s~ ~ '\ ,r~ . iUnt1q If! iillj ~ i nl;l:lCll ~n
~~r'"
>21 00 ' h~l I lI~fl ~ 'I( [j:I j ==e; .=
~o r -n e;~
~:a I C') I! , ~ = .
III ".' "1 Ct. n
I IiI} t~ f > c' =' nn
'.'} I ~== E~
I 'd I ~ !!.
. I ,
I . ....
I . Ct.
c I:""
=
~
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
6A
REVIEW OF DRAFT SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
YES X NO-N/A
--
FEBRUARY 12, 2001
City staff has been working on revising the City Subdivision Ordinance. On October 30,
2000, the City Council and the Planning Commission reviewed the draft Subdivision
Ordinance at a workshop. In essence, the Planning Commission and the City Council
provided input on seven issues identified by the staff. These issues, and the direction we
received at the workshop, are listed below.
1) PARKLAND DEDICATION. The current schedule was acceptable, although the
results of the ongoing parkland study should be incorporated into the ordinance.
The Council and Planning Commission also felt the goals oftree preservation and
parkland dedication should be coordinated. To do so, there should be some
incentive save wooded areas within the parkland dedication requirements. The
Council also felt a developer should be given some credit for building the trails
within a park.
2) SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS. The existing policy is acceptable. The Council and
Planning Commission would like to ensure coordination between the existing
sidewalks and new sidewalks. To that end, there should be some language
defining the intent ofthis ordinance and the intent to coordinate the system.
3) PRIVATE STREETS. The Council and Planning Commission preferred to keep the
existing language. Private streets should only be allowed in a PUD.
4) STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SURFACE WIDTHS. The consensus was that the
ordinance should allow some flexibility in determining street widths.
Environmental concerns should be emphasized in determining whether narrower
streets are appropriate.
S) DETAIL OF INFORMATION AT PRELIMINARY PLAT. The Planning Commission
and Council were comfortable with less detail at the preliminary plat stage. The
staffwas directed to prepare a list of information they feel is necessary.
6) COMBINATION OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLATS. The Council and Planning
Commission had no objection to the establishment of this process. They would
also not object to allowing plats with up to 5 lots to be included in this process.
1:\newsubd\corresp\pc memo.doc
Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
,.
7) DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FEES. The staff was directed to make
recommendations on the fee issue with respect to the legal implications.
Attached is the most recent draft of the' Subdivision Ordinance for your review. We
would like to discuss this ordinance in general at this time. Please keep in mind this is
still a work in progress. We have scheduled this item for a public hearing on February
26, 2001. A new version will be distributed at that time.
I:\newsubd\corresp\pc memo.doc
Page 2
2/6/0111/9/00
DRAFT
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, MN
CHAPTER 1000
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
Subj ect............................................................. Chapter
General Subdivision Provisions ...................... 1001
Procedures For Filing And Review................. 1002
Plat And Data Requirements........................... 1003
Design Standards ............................................ 1 004
Required Basic Improvements ........................ 1005
Administration And Enforcement................... 1006
1001.100
1001.200
1001.300
1001.400
1001.500
1001.600
1001.700
1001.100
1001.200
SECTION 1001 GENERAL SUBDIVISION PROVISIONS
SHORT TITLE
PURPOSE
ApPROVALS NECESSARY FOR ACCEPTANCE OF SUBDIVISION PLATS
CONDITIONS FOR RECORDING
BUILDING PERMITS
EXCEPTIONS
DEFINITIONS
SHORT TITLE: This chapter and the regulations set forth herein shall be
known as the SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PRIOR
LAKE and will be referred to herein as the "Subdivision Ordinance".
PURPOSE: In order to safeguard the best interests ofthe City and to assist
in balancing and harmonizing the interests of the subdivder with those of
the City at large, the following regulations are adopted so that the
adherence to same will bring results beneficial to both parties. It is the
purpose of the Subdivision Ordinance to make certain regulations and
requirements for the platting of land within the City pursuant to the
authority contained in Minnesota Statutes, which regulations the City
Council deems necessary to promote and protect the health, safety and
general welfare ofthis community
Page 1
1001.300
1001.400
1001.500
1001.600
2/1/0111/9/00 I
DRAFT
APPROVALS NECESSARY FOR ACCEPTANCE OF SUBDIVISION PLATS:
Before any plat shall be recorded or be of any validity, it shall be referred
to the City Planning Commission and be approved by the City Council as
having fulfilled the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance.
CONDITIONS FOR RECORDING: No plat of any subdivision shall be
entitled to record in the County Recorder's office or have any validity until
the plat thereof has been prepared, approved and acknowledged in the
manner prescribed by the Subdivision Ordinance.
BUILDING PERMITS: No building permits shall be considered for issuance
by the City for the construction of any building, structure or improvement
to the land or to any lot in a subdivision as defined herein, until all
requirements ofthe Subdivision Ordinance have been fully complied with.
EXCEPTIONS: The following land divisions are exempted from the
provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance and within 10 days of such a
request, the City shall certify that the Subdivision Ordinance does not
apply to such land divisions:
(1) A Divisions of land where the division is to permit the adding of a
parcel ofland to an abutting lot (lot line adjustment) or to create 2 lots
(lot subdivision) and the newly created property line will not cause
the land or any structure to be in violation of the Subdivision
Ordinance or the Zoning Ordinance.
(2) Combinations of 2 or more lots or combinations of lots and portions
of lots with continuous frontage in single ownership and of record
considered to be an individual parcel according to the provisions
Section 1101.501 (3, c) of the Zoning Ordinance.
(3) The combination of2 or more nonconforming lots of record separated
by a private street as permitted under the provisions of Section
1101.501 (3, d).
(4) In the case of a request to divide a base lot upon which a two-family
dwelling, townhouse or a quadraminium which is a part of a recorded
plat where the division is to permit individual private ownership of a
single dwelling unit with such a structure and the newly created
property lines will not cause any of the unit lots or the structure to be
in violation of the Subdivision Ordinance or the Zoning Ordinance.
Page 2
1001.700
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
(5) Administrative Land Subdivisions approved under the provisions of.
Section of the Subdivision Ordinance.
DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of the Subdivision Ordinance, certain
words and terms are hereby defined as set forth in this Section and in
Section 1101.400 of the Zoning Ordinance:
Alley: A public right of way with a width not exceeding 24 feet nor less
than 12 feet which affords a secondary means of access to property
abutting the alley.
Applicant: The owner of land proposed to be subdivided or the owner's
representative. This term shall also include the subdivider and/or the
developer of a subdivision.
Base Lot: A lot with an existing two-family dwelling unit meeting all the
specifications within its zoning district prior to being divided into a two-
family subdivision.
Block: An area of land within a subdivision that is entirely bounded by
streets, or by streets and the entire boundary or boundaries of the
subdivision, or bya combination of the above with a river or lake.
Block Front: The distance between intersections along one side of a
street.
Boulevard: The portion of the street right of way between the curb line
and the property line.
Bufferyard: An area of land established to protect and screen one type of
land use from another land use that is incompatible, pursuant to the
requirements of Section 1107.2000 of the Zoning Ordinance. Normally,
the area is landscaped and kept in open space use. Screening techniques
include the addition of vertical elements such as fences, walls, hedges,
trees, berms or other features to mitigate the effects of incompatible land
uses.
Building: Any structure having a use which may provide shelter or
enclosure of persons, animals, or chattel.
Comprehensive Plan: The group of maps, charts and texts that make up
the comprehensive long-range plan of the city, including, but not limited
Page 3
2/1/0111/9/00 I
DRAFT
to the text of the Comprehensive Plan, the Land Use Plan Map,-
Transportation Plan and the Capital Improvements Program.
Design Standards: The specifications for the preparation of plats, both
preliminary and final, indicating among other things, the optimum,
minimum or maximum dimensions of such items as rights of way, blocks,
easements and lots
Easement: A grant by a property owner for the use of land for the
purpose of constn"cting and maintaining drives and utilities, including, but
not limited to, '" -etlands, ponding areas, sanitary sewers, water mains,
electric lines, teleJhone lines, storm sewer or storm drainage ways and gas
lines.
Final Plat: A drawing or map of a subdivision, meeting all of the
requirements of the City and in such form as required by Minnesota
Statutes and by Scott County for the purpose of recording.
Individual Sewage Treatment System: A septic tank, seepage tile sewage
disposal system, or any other approved sewage treatment device.
Level of Servic e (LOS): A description of traffic conditions along a given
roadway or at a particular intersection. The level of service rangeS from
"A" (free flow of traffic with minimum intersection delays) to "P" (forced
flow, jammed intersections, long delays). It generally reflects factors such
as speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions and
delays.
Lot: A parcf 1 of land occupied or used or intended for occupancy or use
by a use pen-:litted in the Zoning Ordinance, abutting on a public street,
and of suffi dent size to provide the yards required by the Zoning
Ordinance.
Lot Area: The area of a horizontal plane within the lot lines. Only land
above the ordinary high water level of a public water or above the 100-year water
elevation of a wetland or pond may be used to meet the minimum lot area
requirements.
Lot Area, _Minimum: Except as may be otherwise expressly allowed in
the Subdivision Ordinance or the Zoning Ordinance, the area of a
horizontal plane within the lot lines excluding major drainageways,
wetlands, waterbodies, road rights of way, and regional utility/pipeline
easements.
Page 4
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
Lot Buildable: A lot which meets the minimum lot width and area .
requirements of the use district in which it is located.
Lot, Corner: A lot situated at the junction of and abutting on two or more
intersecting streets, or a lot at a point of deflection in alignment of a
continuous street, the interior angle of which does not exceed 135 degrees.
Lot Depth: The mean horizontal distance between the front lot line and
the rear lot line of a lot.
Lot, Flag: A large lot not meeting minimum lot width requirements and
where access to the public road is by a narrow, private right-of-way or
driveway.
Lot Improvement: Any building, structure, place, work of art, or other
object, or improvement of the land on which they are situated constituting
a physical betterment of real property, or any part of such betterment.
Lot, Interior: A lot other than a comer lot.
Lot Line: The property line bounding a lot except that where any portion
of a lot extends into the public right-of-way, street easement, or a proposed
public right-of-way, the line of such public right-of-way or street easement
shall be the lot line for applying this Ordinance.
Lot Line, Front: That boundary of a lot which abuts a street. In the case
of a comer lot, the front lot line shall be the shortest frontage on a public
street. If the dimensions of a comer lot are equal, the front lot line shall be
designated by the owner and filed in the office of the Zoning
Administrator. If a parcel has multiple sides on more than two street
frontages, the front lot line shall be determined by the Zoning
Administrator.
Lot Line, Rear: A lot line not intersecting a front lot line that is most
distant from and most closely parallel to the front lot line. For a lot
bounded by only three lot lines, the rear lot line shall be a line 10 feet in
length within the lot, parallel to and at the maximum distance from, the
front lot line.
Lot Line, Side: A lot line which intersects with a front lot line.
Lot, Through: A lot which has a pair of opposite lot lines abutting 2
substantially parallel streets, and which is not a comer lot.
Page 5
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
Lot Width: The horizontal distance between the side lot lines measured at
the required front yard setback line.
Lot of Record: Any lot. which is one parcel of a plat heretofore or
hereafter duly approved and" filed, or 1 unit of an Auditor's Subdivision or
a Registered Land Surveyor a parcel of land not so platted, subdivided or
registered, for which a Deed, . Auditor's Subdivision or Registered Land
Survey has been recorded in the office of the Register of Deeds or
Registrar of Titles for Scott County, Minnesota, prior to the effective date
of this Ordinance.
Metes and Bounds: A method of describing the boundaries of land by
direction (bounds) and distances (metes) from a known point of reference.
Lots described by this method are generally unplatted parcels.
Outlot: A lot remnant or parcel of land left over after platting, which is
intended as open space or other use, for which no development is intended
and for which no building permit shall be issued. Outlots may also be
platted for parcels intended as private streets and platted or reserved for
future phases of a development.
Parks and Playgrounds: Public land and open spaces In the City
dedicated or reserved for recreation purposes.
. Pedestrian Way (Walkway): A public right-of-way across a block or
within a block to provide access for pedestrians and which may be used
for the installation of utility lines.
Pipeline: A pipe with a nominal diameter of six inches or more, located
in the state, that is used to transport hazardous liquids, but does not
include pipe used to transport a hazardous liquid by gravity, and pipe used
to transport or store a hazardous liquid within a refining, storage, or
manufacturing facility; or a pipe operated at a pressure of more than 275
pounds per square inch that carries gas.
Pipeline easement: The existing easement or a subsequent easement
resulting from the negotiation of a change in the boundaries of the existing
easement.
Place of public assembly: A site that is occupied by 20 or more persons
on at least five days a week for ten weeks in any 12-month period. The
days and weeks need not be consecutive.
Planning Commission: The Planning Commission of the City.
Page 6
2/1 /0 111/9/00
DRAFT
Plat: A map of a subdivision showing the boundaries and location of.
individual lots, outlots, easements, streets and other rights-of-way.
Plat, CIC: A Common Interest Community Plat as described and defined
by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 515B.
Plat, Final: A map of all or, in the case of a phased or staged
development a portion of a subdivision, presented to the City Council for
final approval.
Plat, Preliminary: A map indicating the proposed layout of the
subdivision submitted to the City Council for preliminary approval.
Protective Covenants: A recorded contract made between private parties
as to the manner in which land may be used, with the view to protecting
and preserving the physical and economic integrity of any given area.
Public Improvement: Any sanitary sewer system, water system, storm
sewer system, streets, concrete curb and gutter, street lights, ponding,
underground utilities, iron monuments, sidewalks, trails, landscaping or
other facility for which the City may ultimately assume the responsibility
for maintenance and operation, or which may affect an improvement for
which local government responsibility is established.
Public Works Design Manual: A policy manual adopted by the City of
Prior Lake for developers, builders and their engineers as well as City
engineers and consulting engineering personnel regulating and identifying
the minimum standards for the design, construction, and connection to
public infrastructure facilities within the City.
Replat: The subdivision of land in accordance with the Subdivision
Ordinance which has previously been platted and which is of record with
the County pursuant to Minnesota Statute, chapter 505.
Right-of-Way: An area or strip of land, either public or private, on which a
right.;of-passage has been recorded for the use of pedestrians and vehicles,
including trains, or pedestrians or both.
Page 7
2/1/0111/9100
DRAFT
! I
!o i c? I
_.. I-L... i
~~
................................................. J -.. j
:.:~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. 'CllIQ
CJ. l...rt -r-' !
jlJ i I
Setback: See Yard
SidewalklTrail: A paved path provided for pedestrian or bicycle use and
usually located at the side of a road within a right-of-way.
Sketch Plan: A concept plan or informal map of a proposed subdivision
of sufficient accuracy to be used for the purpose of discussion and
classification of City ordinances with the City staff.
Street. A public or private thoroughfare that is used, or intended to be
used, for passage or travel by pedestrians and vehicles. Streets are further
classified in the Comprehensive Plan by the functions they perform.
Local Street: Roadways typically having lowest traffic volumes,
containing one lane of traffic in each direction whose primary
function is to provide access to and from property, and from
neighborhoods to minor collectors.
Cul-De-Sac: A local street with only one outlet and having an
appropriate terminal for the safe and convenient reversal of traffic
movement.
Minor Collector: Roadways containing one lane of traffic in each
direction. The primary function is to provide access to and from
neighborhoods and the local street system.
Major Collector: Roadways containing one or two lanes of traffic
in each direction with controlled intersections whose function is to
serve long trips within the City and access to and from collector
streets and to and from minor and major arterials.
Minor Arterials: Interregional roads containing one or two lanes
in each direction with limited access and controlled intersections at
other arterials and collector streets. Minor arterials convey traffic
between towns, boroughs, or other urban centers and are used to
Page 8
2/1 /0 111/9/00
DRAFT
reduce the number of trips on the regional system. Efficient.
movement is the primary function of a minor arterial road.
Principal Arterials: Limited access interregional arterial routes
containing two or more lanes in each direction. They are designed
exclusively for unrestricted movement, have no private access, and
intersect only with selected arterial highways or major streets by
means of interchanges engineered for free-flowing movement.
Subdivider: Any individual, firm, association, syndicate, partnership,
corporation, trust or other legal entity having sufficient proprietary interest
in the land sought to be subdivided to commence and maintain
proceedings to subdivide the same under the Subdivision Ordinance.
Subdivision: The division of an area, lot, parcel or tract of land into two
(2) or more parcels, tracts, lots or long-term leasehold interests by any
means including, but not limited to, preliminary and final plats, CIC plats
registered land surveys, administrative subdivisions and conveyance by
metes and bounds.
Unit Lots: A lot created from the subdivision of an existing building with
more than two dwelling units having different minimum lot size
requirements than the conventional base lot within the Zoning Use
District.
Yard: A required open space on a lot, which is unoccupied and
unobstructed by a structure from its lowest ground level to the sky except as
expressly permitted in this Ordinance. The yard shall extend along a lot line
and at right angles to the lot line to a depth or width specified in the yard
regulations for the district in which the lot is located.
Page 9
1002.100
1002.200
1002.300
1002.400
1002.500
1002.600
1002.700
1002.100
1002.101
1002.200
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
SECTION 1002
PROCEDURES FOR FILING AND REVIEW OF SUBDIVISIONS
SKETCH PLAN
PRELIMINARY PLAT
FINAL PLAT
COMBINING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLATS
EFFECT OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
PREMATURE SUBDIVISIONS
REGIONAL SYSTEM SERVICE INADEQUACIES
SKETCH PLAN: An applicant may submit a sketch plan to the Planning
Department prior to filing an application for a preliminary plat. The
purpose of this submittal is to inform the applicant of the procedural
requirements and minimum standards of the Subdivision Ordinance, and
the requirements or limitations imposed by other City ordinances, plans
and/or policies, prior to the preparation of a preliminary plat. The
Planning staff, along with other City staff, will review the sketch plan and
discuss any foreseeable problems or issues with the applicant. These
discussions of the sketch plan shall not be considered binding in regard to
subsequent plat review. The Planning Department, notably in the case of.
multi-phased projects, shall have the authority to refer the sketch plan to
the Planning Commission and/or City Council for review and comment.
An application for review of a sketch plan shall include, but not be limited
to the following:
(1) A completed application form provided by the City which shall
include the name, address and telephone number of the applicant and
the fee owner of the property, a description of the location of the
property, a description of the proposed development and a working
name for the proposed development.
(2) Six (6) copies of the sketch plan at a scale not less than one inch equals
one hundred feet (1' = 100').
(3) An eleven inch by seventeen inch (11" x 17") reduction of each sheet
of the sketch plan.
(4) The information required in Section 1003.100 of this Subdivision
Ordinance.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
Page 1 0
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
(1) FILING: An application for a preliminary plat, signed by the applicant
and the fee owner of the property, shall be submitted to the Planning
Department. This application shall be accompanied by the following:
a. Ten (10) full-scale copies and one 11" by 17" reduction of the
preliminary plat
b. All of the information required in Section 1003.200.
c. A radius map and a list and labels of the names and addresses of
owners of property located within five hundred feet (500') of the
subject property. These shall be obtained from and certified by an
abstract company or the Scott County Auditor's Office.
d. The required filing fee(s) as established by the City Council.
e. Any necessary applications for variances from the provisions of the
Subdivision Ordinance shall be submitted with the required fee.
(2) In accordance with Minnesota Statutes ~ 15.99, the City shall review
the application and notify the applicant within 10 business days of
submittal whether or not the application is complete. The plat shall
not be officially submitted and considered complete until all the
information requirements are complied with.
(3) HEARING: The Planning Department, upon receipt of a complete
application, shall set a public hearing date for public review of the
preliminary plat. The hearing shall not be held until staff has had
adequate time to review and prepare a report to the Planning
Commission on the subdivision application. Notice of the hearing
shall consist of the date, time and place of the hearing, a legal
description of the property, a description of the property reasonably
calculated to inform a person of the location, and description of the
preliminary plat request and where and when information pertaining to
the preliminary plat may be obtained. The hearing notice shall be
published in the official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the
hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be posted on the site at least
10 days prior to the hearing date. Written notification of the hearing
shall be mailed to all owners of land within five hundred feet (500') of
the boundary of the property in question at least ten (10) days prior to
the hearing. Any omission or defect which is found not to have
impaired the ability of a surrounding property owner to participate in
the proceedings shall in no way impair the validity of the proceedings
on the proposed application.
Page 11
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
(4) REVIEW BY OTHER COMMISSIONS OR JURISDICTIONS: The staff.
shall refer copies of the preliminary plat to County, Metropolitan, State
or other public entities for their review and comment, where
appropriate.
(5) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission shall
conduct a public hearing in accordance with Section 1109.200 of the
Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission may continue the
public hearing and shall report its findings and make a
recommendation to the City Council within 60 days of the date a
complete application was received by the City. If the Planning
Commission has not acted upon the preliminary plat within sixty (60)
days following delivery of a subdivision application completed in
compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance, the Council may act on
the preliminary plat without the Planning Commission's
recommendation.
(6) CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
a. The Council shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
preliminary plat within one hundred twenty (120) days following
delivery of a complete application unless the applicant has agreed,
in writing, to an extension ofthe statutory review period.
b. In considering a preliminary plat application, the City Council may
impose reasonable conditions and restrictions as part of the
preliminary plat approval that are deemed necessary and
appropriate to protect the public health, safety and welfare.
c. If the preliminary plat is not approved by the City Council, the
Council shall adopt written findings regarding the basis and
rationale for denying the application. The reasons for such action
shall be recorded in the minutes of the Council proceedings.
d. If the preliminary plat is approved, such approval shall not
constitute final acceptance ofthe plat. Subsequent approval will be
required for the engineering proposals and other features and
requirements as specified by the Subdivision Ordinance to be
indicated on the final plat. The City Council may require such
revisions in the preliminary plat and final plat as it deems
necessary for the health, safety, general welfare and convenience of
the City.
e. Once a preliminary plat is approved by the City Council, the
subdivider must submit an application for a final plat within twelve
Page 12
1002.300
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
(12) months after approval of the preliminary plat. If an applicant.
fails to submit an application for a final plat within the specified 12
month period, the preliminary plat shall be considered void, unless
a request for time extension is submitted in writing and approved
by the City Council at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the
12 month period. Such extensions of time shall not exceed six (6)
months.
FINAL PLAT
(1) FILING: After the preliminary plat has been approved, the final plat
shall be submitted for review as set forth in the subsections which
follow. A final plat application, signed by the applicant and the fee
owner of the property shall be submitted to the Planning Department
accompanied by the following information.
a. Ten (10) full-scale copies and one 11" by 17" reduction of the final
plat.
b. All information required in Section 1003.300.
c. The required filing fee(s) as established by the City Council.
resolution shall be paid.
(2) In accordance with Minnesota Statutes ~ 15.99, the City shall review
the application and notify the applicant within 10 business days of
submittal whether or not the application is complete. The plat shall
not be officially submitted and considered complete until all the
information requirements are complied with.
(3) APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL: The final plat and a signed
Development Contract shall be submitted to the City Council for
approval. The City Council shall adopt a resolution approving the
final plat and development contract. The resolution shall provide for
the acceptance of all agreements for basic improvements, public
dedication, payment of fees and other requirements as indicated by the
City Council. If the City Council denies the final plat, the Council
shall adopt a resolution with written findings supporting the basis for
denial. The findings for any refusal to approve a plat shall be set forth
in the minutes of the Council proceedings and reported to the person or
persons applying for such approval.
(4) SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS: When any existing special assessments
which have been levied against the property described shall be divided
Page 13
1002.400
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
and allocated to the respective lots in the proposed plat, the City .
Finance Director shall distribute the remaining assessment balance on
a per equal unit basis, prepare a revised assessment roll, filing the same
with the County Auditor~ If the per lot unit assessment is less than
$1,000.00, then the entire assessment balance shall be paid before the
final plat is released.
(5) RECORDING FINAL PLAT AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT:
a. If the final plat and Development Contract are approved by the
City Council, the subdivider shall record both documents with the
County Recorder within sixty (60) days after said approval. The
subdivider shall, immediately upon recording, furnish the City with
a print and reproducible tracing of the final plat showing evidence
of the recording. The subdivider shall also furnish a copy of the
recorded final plat in electronic format prescribed by the City. No
building permits shall be approved for construction of any structure
on any lot in said plat until the City has received evidence the plat
has been recorded with the County.
b. The final plat shall be considered void if not recorded within the 60
. days provided for herein unless a request for time extension is
submitted in writing and approved by the City Council prior to the
expiration of the 60 day period.
(6) RECORDING FINAL PLATS OF MUL TI-PHASED PLATS: If a subdivider
plans to develop a subdivision in stages over a period of time, the City
Council must approve a staging plan for the development. The staging
plan must be submitted as part of the final plat application. The
approved staging plan will be incorporated into the Development
Contract. Future phases of the development must be platted as outlots
on the final plat. If a preliminary plat is final platted in stages, all
stages must be final platted into lots and blocks, not outlots, within
two (2) years after the approval of the preliminary plat unless
otherwise provided in the Development Contract. Failure to obtain
final plat approval for all phases of the development within the two (2)
year period or within the timelines of the approved staging plan shall
render the remaining stages ofthe preliminary plat void.
COMBINATION OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT
APPROVAL. In some instances, due to the simplicity of the proposed
subdivision, it makes sense to combine the preliminary and final plat
process. The process may be combined only when a proposed subdivision
meets the following requirements:
Page 14
1002.401
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
(1) The resulting subdivision contains no more than 3 lots.
(2) The proposed subdivision is located in an area where streets and
utilities are in place and ~capable of serving the subdivision.
(3) The proposed subdivision does not require the dedication or
construction of future streets, and will not interfere with proper
development of adjacent properties.
(4) The resulting parcels shall conform with all provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance.
PROCEDURE FOR CONSIDERING COMBINED PRELIMINARY AND FINAL
PLATS.
(1) FILING: An application for a combined preliminary and final plat,
signed by the applicant and the fee owner of the property, shall be
submitted to the Planning Department. This application shall be
accompanied by the following:
a. Ten (10) full-scale copies and one 11" by 17" reduction of the
preliminary plat
b. All of the information required in Section 1003.200 and in Section
1003.300.
c. A radius map and a list and labels of the names and addresses of
owners of property located within five hundred feet (500') of the
subject property. These shall be obtained from and certified by an
abstract company or the Scott County Auditor's Office.
d. The required filing fee(s) as established by the City Council.
(2) In accordance with Minnesota Statutes S 15.99, the City shall review
the application and notify the applicant within 10 business days of
submittal whether or not the application is complete. The plat shall
not be officially submitted and considered complete until all the
information requirements are complied with.
(3) HEARING: The Planning Department, upon receipt of a complete
application, shall set a public hearing date for public review of the
combined preliminary and final plat. The hearing shall not be held
until staff has had adequate time to review and prepare a report to the
Planning Commission on the subdivision application. Notice of the
hearing shall consist of the date, time and place of the hearing, a legal
description of the property, a description of the property reasonably
calculated to inform a person of the location, and description of the
Page 15
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
preliminary plat request and where and when information pertaining to
the preliminary plat may be obtained. The hearing notice shall be
published in the official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the
hearing. Notice of the .~earillg shall also be posted on the site at least
10 days prior to the hearing date. Written notification of the hearing
shall be mailed to all owners of land within five hundred feet (500') of
the boundary of the property in question at least ten (10) days prior to
the hearing. Any omission or defect which is found not to have
impaired the ability of a surrounding property owner to participate in
the proceedings shall in no way impair the validity of the proceedings
on the proposed application.
(4) REVIEW BY OTHER COMMISSIONS OR JURISDICTIONS: The staff
shall refer copies of the preliminary plat to County, Metropolitan, State
or other public entities for their review and comment, where
appropriate.
(5) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission shall
conduct a public hearing in accordance with Section 1109.200 of the
Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission may continue the
public hearing and shall report its findings and make a
recommendation to the City Council within 60 days of the date a
complete application was received by the City. If the Planning
Commission has not acted upon the preliminary plat within sixty (60)
days following delivery of a subdivision application completed in
compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance, the Council may act on
the preliminary plat without the Planning Commission's
recommendation.
(6) CITY COUNCIL ACTION: The combined preliminary and final plat and
a signed Development Contract shall be submitted to the City Council
for approval. The City Council shall adopt a resolution approving the
final plat and development contract within 120 days following delivery
of a complete application unless the applicant has agreed, in writing, to
an extension of the statutory' review period. The, resolution shall
provide for the acceptance of all agreements for basic improvements,
public dedication, payment of fees and other requirements as indicated
by the City Council. If the City Council denies the [mal plat, the
Council shall adopt a resolution with written findings supporting the
basis for denial. The findings for any refusal to approve a plat shall be
set forth in the minutes of the Council proceedings and reported to the
person or persons applying for such approval.
(7) SPECIAL AsSESSMENTS: When any existing special assessments
which have been levied against the property described shall be divided
Page 16
1002.500
1002.600
1002.601
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
and allocated to the respective lots in the proposed plat, the City .
Finance Director shall distribute the remaining assessment balance on
a per equal unit basis, prepare a revised assessment roll, filing the same
with the County Auditor. If the per lot unit assessment is less than
$1,000.00, then the entire assessment balance shall be paid before the
final plat is released.
(8) RECORDING FINAL PLAT ANn DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT:
a. If the final plat and Development Contract are approved by the
City Council, the subdivider shall record both documents with the
County Recorder within sixty (60) days after said approval. The
subdivider shall, immediately upon recording, furnish the City with
a print and reproducible tracing of the final plat showing evidence
of the recording. The subdivider shall also furnish a copy of the
recorded final plat in electronic format prescribed by the City. No
building permits shall be approved for construction of any structure
on any lot in said plat until the City has received evidence the plat
has been recorded with the County.
b. The final plat shall be considered void if not recorded within the 60
days provided for herein unless a request for time extension is
submitted in writing and approved by the City Council prior to the
expiration of the 60 day period.
EFFECT OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL: For one year following
preliminary plat approval and for two (2) years following final plat
approval, unless the subdivider and the City agree otherwise, no
amendment to the City of Prior Lake's Comprehensive Plan or Subdivision
Ordinance shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size,
lot layout, or dedication required or permitted by the approved plat.
Thereafter, upon resolution of the City Council, the City may extend the
period by agreement with the subdivider, or it may require submission of a
new plat unless substantial physical activity and investment has occurred
in reasonable reliance on the approved plat and the subdivider will suffer
substantial financial damage as a consequence of a requirement to submit
a new plat.
PREMATURE SUBDIVISIONS: Any preliminary plat/final plat and/or
development is premature pursuant to the criteria listed below.
CONDITION ESTABLISHING PREMATURE SUBDIVISIONS: A subdivision
may be determined to be premature should any of the provisions which
follow exist:
Page 17
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
(1) LACK OF ADEQUATE DRAINAGE: A condition of inadequate drainage
exists if any of the following provisions exist:
a. Surface or subsurface water retention and runoff is such that it
constitutes a danger. to the structural integrity of the proposed
structures.
b. The proposed site grading and development will cause pollution of
water sources or damage from erosion and siltation on downhill or
downstream land.
c. Factors to be considered in making these determinations may
include, but are not limited to: average rainfall for the area; the
relation of the land to flood plains; and the nature of soils and
subsoils and their ability to adequately support surface water
runoff.
(2) LACK OF ADEQUATE WATER SUPPLY: A proposed subdivision lacks
an adequate water supply if the proposed subdivision does not have
adequate sources of water to serve the proposed subdivision when
developed to its maximum permissible density without causing an
unreasonable depletion of existing water supplies for surrounding
areas.
A3) LACK OF ADEQUATE ROADS OR HIGHWAYS To SERVE THE
SUBDIVISION: A proposed subdivision lacks adequate roads or
highways to serve the subdivision when any of the following
provisions exist:
a. Roads which serve the proposed subdivision are of such a width,
grade, stability, vertical and horizontal alignment, site distance and
surface condition that the increase in traffic volume generated by
the proposed subdivision would be detrimental to the City's
interest in promoting and protecting the public safety and general
welfare, or seriously aggravate an already dangerous or hazardous
condition, or when, with due regard to the advice of Scott County
and/or the Minnesota Department of Transportation, said roads are
inadequate for the intended use.
b. The traffic volume generated by the proposed subdivision would
decrease the level of service on highways existing at the time of the
application or proposed for completion within the next two (2)
years.
(4) LACK OF ADEQUATE WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS: A proposed
subdivision lacks adequate waste disposal systems if, in subdivisions
for which sewer lines are proposed, there is inadequate sewer capacity
Page 18
1002.602
1002.603
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
in the existing system to support the subdivision if developed to its.
maximum permissible density after reasonable sewer capacity is
reserved for schools, planned public facilities, and commercial and
industrial development projected for the next five (5) years.
(5) INCONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: A proposed
subdivision is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan when
the subdivision is inconsistent with the purposes, objectives and
recommendations of the adopted Comprehensive Plan of Prior Lake,
as may be amended. Subdivisions that are not proposed in areas
consistent with the criteria for allocation of MUSA reserve shall be
deemed inconsistent.
(6) PUBLIC SERVICE CAPACITY: A proposed subdivision lacks necessary
public service capacity when services such as recreational facilities,
schools, police and fire protection and other public facilities, which
must be provided at public expense, cannot reasonably be provided for
within the next two (2) years.
(7) INCONSISTENCY WITH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS: A proposed
subdivision is inconsistent with capital improvement plans when
improvements and/or services necessary to accommodate the proposed
subdivision have not been programmed in the Prior Lake, Scott
County or other regional Capital Improvement Plans. The City
Council may waive this criteria when it can be demonstrated that a
revision to the City capital improvement program can be
accommodated.
BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING: The burden shall be upon the applicant to
show that the proposed subdivision or development is not premature.
PROCESS USED TO DEFINE A PREMATURE SUBDIVISION.
(1) ApPLICATION. Upon receipt of an application for a preliminary plat or
a final plat, the City staff will review the application based on the
criteria listed in Section 1002.601 of the Subdivision Ordinance to
determine if the proposed subdivision is premature.
(2) NOTIFICATION. If the staff fmds a subdivision premature under the
criteria listed in Section 1002.601, the applicant will be notified of the
staffs findings in writing within 60 days of receipt of a complete
application. This notification shall constitute denial of the application.
(3) APPEAL. Any owner of affected property or any applicant may appeal
the staff finding of a premature subdivision to the City Council. The
Page 19
1002.700
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
appeal must be in writing and must be filed with the Planning.
Department within 5 calendar days after the date of the written
notification of the decision. The required fee shall be paid when the
appeal request is filed. . When an appeal is received by the City, the
applicant will be notified o(the date and time the City Council will
hear the appeal. No appeal will be heard until all owners of property
within 500 feet of the subject property are notified of the date
scheduled for the appeal hearing. Notice shall be provided in the
manner set out in subsection 1109.200 of the Zoning Ordinance. The
City Council shall hear the appeal within 30 days of the filing of the
appeal unless that period is extended with consent of the appellant.
The City Council shall render a decision within 30 days of the
conclusion of the appeal hearing.
REGIONAL SYSTEM SERVICE INADEQUACIES
(1) EXISTING CONDITIONS: An approved preliminary plat or building
permit within an approved final plat may be deemed as premature
development if any of the following conditions set forth are found to
exist:
a. . The regionally controlled metropolitan sanitary sewer interceptors
or waste water treatment facilities are classified as having
inadequate capacity to provide service within the standards of
recognized public health and safety.
b. Responsible metropolitan units of government prohibit the City
from issuing building permits.
c. Regional transportation systems are deemed as inadequate to
provide service levels within standards of recognized public safety.
d. Storm drainage systems under the jurisdiction of regional
watershed districts, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources, or other such responsible
jurisdictions are inadequate to provide service levels within
standards ofrecognized public health and safety.
(2) CITY LIABILITY EXEMPTION: All preliminary and final plat
approvals and related formal development contracts shall stipulate and
shall exempt the City from any liability associated with platting or
building permit denial based upon factors and conditions related to
regional governmental agency and unit jurisdictions and related service
inadequacies.
Page 20
1003.100
1003.200
1003.300
1003.400
1003.500
1003.100
1003.200
1003.201
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
1003 PLAT AND DATA REQUIREMENTS
SKETCH PLAN
PRELIMINARY PLAT
FINAL PLAT
CERTIFICATION REQUIRED
MODIFICATIONS TO APPROVED FINAL PLANS
SKETCH PLAN: Sketch plans shall contain, at a mInImUm, the
following information:
(1) Plat boundary.
(2) North arrow
(3) Scale.
(4) Street layout on and adjacent to plat.
(5) Designation of land use and current or proposed zoning.
(6) Significant topographical or physical features.
(7) General lot locations and layout.
(8) Preliminary evaluation by the applicant that the subdivision is not
classified as premature based upon criteria established in Chapter 2 of
the Subdivision Ordinance.
PRELIMINARY PLAT: The subdivider shall prepare and submit a
preliminary plat application together with any necessary supplementary
information, a preliminary grading plan and a preliminary utility plan.
The plans shall contain the information set forth in the subsections which
follow.
PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUIREMENTS:
(1) GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:
a. Proposed name of subdivision; names shall not duplicate or too
closely resemble names of existing subdivisions.
b. Location of boundary lines in relation to a known section, quarter
section or quarter-quarter section lines comprising a legal
description of the property.
Page 21
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
c. Names and addresses of all persons having property interest, the
developer, designer and surveyor together with his registration
number.
d. Graphic scale or plat,. not less than one inch to one hundred feet (1"
= 100')
e. Date and north arrow.
f. Identify portions of property that are registered (Torrens).
(2) EXISTING CONDITIONS:
a. Boundary line and total acreage of proposed plat, clearly indicated.
b. Existing Comprehensive Plan designations and zoning
classifications for land within and abutting, the subdivision,
including shoreland district boundaries.
c. Location, widths and names of all existing or previously platted
streets or other public ways, showing type, width and condition of
improvements, if any, railroad and utility rights of way, parks and
other public open spaces, permanent buildings and structures, .
easements and section and corporate lines within the tract and to a
distance of two hundred feet (200') beyond the tract.
d. Boundary lines of adjoining unsubdivided or subdivided land,
within two hundred feet (200'), identified by name and ownership,
including all contiguous land owned or controlled by the
subdivider.
e. Any other information the City finds necessary to determine the
impact the proposed subdivision will have on the health, safety and
welfare of property in the City and its residents.
(3) PROPOSED DESIGN FEATURES:
a. Layout of proposed streets showing the right-of-way widths, center
line gradients, typical street sections, and proposed names of
streets. The name of any street heretofore used in the City or its
environs shall not be used unless the proposed street is a logical
extension of an already named street, in which event the same
name shall be used.
b. Locations and widths of proposed alleys and pedestrian ways.
c. Location, dimension and purpose of all easements.
d. Layout, numbers, lot areas and preliminary dimensions of lots and
blocks.
Page 22 .
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
e. Minimum front and side street building setback lines. When lots.
are located on a curve, the width of the lot at the required front
yard setback must be identified.
f. Areas, other than .streets, alleys, pedestrian ways, and utility
easements, intended to be dedicated or reserved for public use,
including the size of such area or areas in acres.
g. Any other information the City finds necessary to determine the
impact the proposed subdivision will have on the health, safety and
welfare of property in the City and its residents.
(4) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Any or all of the supplementary
information requirements set forth in this subsection shall be submitted
when deemed necessary by the City staff, City Attorney, consultants to
the City, advisory bodies and/or City Council.
a. Proposed restrictive covenants.
b. An accurate soil survey of the subdivision prepared by a qualified
person.
c. Statement of the proposed use of lots stating type of buildings with
number of proposed dwelling units or type of business or industry,
so as to reveal the effect of the development on traffic, fire hazards
and congestion of population.
d. If any zoning changes are contemplated, the proposed zoning plan
for the areas, including dimensions, shall be shown. Such proposed
zoning plan shall be for information only and shall not vest any
right in the applicants.
e. The subdivider shall be required to submit a sketch plan of
adjacent properties so as to show the possible relationships
between the proposed subdivision and future subdivisions. All
subdivisions shall be required to relate well with existing or
potential adjacent subdivisions.
f. Where structures are to be placed on lots which are subject to
potential replat, the preliminary plat shall indicate a logical way in
which the lots could possibly be resubdivided in the future.
g. Where irregular shaped lots have been proposed, house plans shall
be submitted which demonstrate such lots to be buildable and the
resulting structure compatible in size and character to the
surrounding area.
h. A comprehensive screening plan which identifies all proposed
buffering and screening in both plan and sectional view.
Page 23
1003.202
2/1/0111/9100 I
DRAFT
1. Any other information the City finds necessary to determine the '
impact the proposed subdivision will have on the health, safety and
welfare of property in the City and its residents.
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN: The developer shall submit a preliminary
grading, drainage and erosion control plan, prepared by a registered
profession engineer in accordance with Minnesota State Rules, including
the following information:
(1) North arrow, scale (not less than l' = 100') and legend.
(2) Lot and block numbers, house pad location, home style and proposed
building pad elevations at garage slab and lowest floor for each lot.
(3) Topography in two foot (2') contour intervals with existing contours
shown as dashed lines and proposed contours as solid lines. Existing
topography shall extend a minimum of two hundred feet (200')
outside of the tract to be subdivided or outside of the contributing
drainage area, whichever is greater.
(4) Location of all natural features on the tract. Natural features are
considered to include, but are not limited to, the following: tree lines,
wetlands, ponds, lakes, streams, drainage channels, bluffs, steep
slopes, etc.
(5) Location - of all existing storm sewer facilities, including pipes,
manholes, catch basins, ponds, swales, and drainage channels within
two hundred feet (200') of the tract. Existing and proposed pipe
grades, rim and invert elevations, and normal and high water
elevations must be included.
(6) If plat is located within or adjacent to a 100-year flood plain, flood
elevations and locations must be clearly shown on the plan.
(7) Spot elevations at drainage break points and directional arrows
indicating site, swale and lot drainage.
(8) Locations, grades, rim and invert elevations of all storm sewer
facilities, including ponds, proposed to serve the tract.
(9) Locations and elevations of all street high and low points.
(10) Street grades, with a maximum permissible grade of eight percent
(8%) and a minimum of five-tenths percent (0.5%).
(11) Phasing of grading.
(12) The location of all easements and right-of-way.
(13) All soil erosion and sediment control measures to be incorporated
during and after construction must be shown. Locations and standard
detail plates for each measure must be included on the plan.
Page 24
1003.203
2/1 /0 111/9/00
DRAFT
(14) All revegetation measures proposed for the tract, including seed and .
mulch types and application rates must be included on the plan.
(15) A Tree Preservation Plan as required by Section 1107.2100 of the
Zoning Ordinance.
(16) Any other information the City finds necessary to determine the
impact the proposed subdivision will have on the health, safety and
welfare of property in the City and its residents.
PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN:
(1) EASEMENTS: Location, dimension and purpose of all easements.
(2) UNDERGROUND FACILITIES: Location and size of existing sewers,
water mains, culverts, or other underground facilities within the tract
and to a minimum distance of two hundred feet (200') beyond the tract.
Such data as grades, invert elevations, and location of catch basins,
manholes and hydrants shall also be shown.
(3) WATER SUPPLY: Water mains shall be provided to serve the
subdivision by extension of an existing community system. Service
connections shall be stubbed into the property line and all necessary
fire hydrants shall also be provided. Extensions of the public water
supply system shall be designed so as to provide public water in
accordance with the Public Works Design Manual design standards as
approved by the City Engineer and in accordance with the City's
Comprehensive Water Plan.
(4) SEWAGE DISPOSAL: Sanitary sewer mains and service connections
shall be installed in accordance with the Public Works Design Manual
of the City.
(5) SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES: Locations, grades, rim and invert
elevations, and sizes of all proposed sanitary sewer facilities to serve
the tract.
(6) STORM SEWER: Storm sewer layout and supporting calculations as
outlined in the Public Works Design Manual.
(7) HYDRANTS AND VALVES: Location of all proposed hydrants and
valves for the proposed water mains.
(8) Any other information the City finds necessary to determine the
impact the proposed subdivision will have on the health, safety and
welfare of property in the City and its residents.
Page 25
1003.300
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
FINAL PLAT: The owner or subdivider shall submit a final plat, final.
grading, development, and erosion control plans, and final utility plans,
together with any necessary supplementary information. The final plat,
prepared for recording pu~oses, shall be prepared in accordance with
provisions of State statutes and County regulations, and such final plat
shall contain the following information:
(1) Name of the subdivision.
(2) Location by section, township, range, County and State, and including
descriptive boundaries of the subdivision, based on an accurate
traverse, giving angular and linear dimensions which must
mathematically close.
(3) The location of monuments shall be shown and described on the final
plat. Locations of such monuments shall be shown in reference to
existing official monuments on the nearest established street lines,
including true angles and distances to such reference points or
monuments.
(4) Location of lots, streets, public highways, alleys, parks and other
features, with accurate dimensions in feet and decimals of feet, with
the length of radii and/or arcs of all curves, and with all other
information necessary to reproduce the plat on the ground shall be
shown. Dimensions shall be shown from all angle points of curve to
lot lines.
(5) Lots and outlots shall be numbered clearly. Blocks are to be
numbered, with numbers shown clearly in the center of the block.
(6) The exact locations, widths and names of all streets to be dedicated.
(7) Location and width of all easements to be dedicated.
(8) Name and address ofthe registered land surveyor preparing the plat.
(9) Scale of the plat shall be 100 scale with the scale shown graphically
on a bar scale along with the date and north arrow.
(lO)A Statement dedicating all easements as follows: "Easements for
installation and maintenance of utilities and drainage facilities are
reserved over, under and along the strips marked drainage and utility
easements".
(ll)A Statement dedicating all streets, alleys and other public areas not
previously dedicated as follows: "Streets, alleys, and other public
areas shown on this plat and not heretofore dedicated to public use are
hereby so dedicated".
Page 26
1003.400
1003.500
1003.501
1003.502
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
(12)The final grading, development and erosion control plan must be
prepared in accordance with the current City Public Works Design
Manual.
(13)A title report prepared by a title company indicating owners and
encumbrances on the property and a statement as to which parts of the
property are registered (Torrens).
CERTIFICATION REQUIRED:
(1) Certification by a registered surveyor in the form required by
Minnesota Statutes, section 505.03, as amended from time to time.
(2) Execution by all owners of any interest in the land, any holders of a
mortgage thereon, of the certificates required by Minnesota Statutes,
section 505.03, as amended, and which certificate shall include a
dedication of the utility easements and other public areas in such form
as approved by the City.
(3) Space for certificates of approval and review to be filled in by the
signatures ofthe Mayor and City Manager.
MODIFICATIONS TO APPROVED FINAL PLANS. Any
modifications to approved final plans must be reviewed and approved by
the City. Changes may be classified as minor or major changes, and shall
be approved according to the following procedures.
MINOR MODIFICATIONS. Minor modifications are changes that do not
substantially affect the design of the approved plat. Minor modifications
include: changes to the grading plans, changes to tree preservation plans
do not increase the number of trees to be removed, changes to the
landscaping plan, and engineering design changes to streets or utilities
required as a result of previously unknown field conditions. Requests for
minor modifications must be submitted to City staff for review and
approval prior to the commencement of any work.
MAJOR MODIFICATIONS. Major modifications are changes substantially
affecting the design of the subdivision. Major modifications include:
increase in the number of approved lots, realignment of roads outside of
the dedicated right-of-way, placement of utilities outside of d(~dicated
easements, and changes in parkland dedication. Major modifications shall
require approval of the City Council. The Council may choose to refer
major modifications to the Planning Commission for a public hearing.
Page 27
1004.100
1004.200
1004.300
1004.400
1004.500
1004.600
1004.700
1004.800
1004.900
1004.1000
1004.11 00
1004.1200
1004.100
1004.200
1004.201
1004.202
1004.300
1004.301
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
1004 DESIGN STANDARDS
PUBLIC WORKS DESIGN MANUAL
BI.OCKS
LOTS
STREETS AND ALLEYS
SIDEWALKS AND MULTI-PURPOSE TRAILS
EASEMENTS
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
STORM DRAINAGE
I'ROTECTED AREAS
nEDICATION REQUIREMENTS
MINIMUM DESIGN FEATURES
ZONING ORDINANCE CONSISTENCY
ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS. The design standards
outlined in the City Public Works Design Manual are hereby adopted and
incorporated into this ordinance by reference.
BLOCKS:
BLOCK LENGTH: In general, intersecting streets, determining block
lengths, shall be provided at such intervals so as to serve cross-traffic
adequately and to meet existing streets. Where no existing plats control,
the blocks in residential subdivisions should not exceed one thousand
three hundred twenty five feet (1,325') nor be less than four hundred feet
(400') in length, except where topography or other conditions justify a
departure from this these dimensions. In blocks longer than eight hundred
feet (800'), the City may require pedestrian ways and/or easements through
the block near the center of the block.
BLOCK WIDTH: The width of the block shall normally be sufficient to
allow two (2) tiers of lots of appropriate depth. Blocks intended for
business or industrial use shall be of such width as to be considered most
suitable for their respective use, including adequate space for off-street
parking and deliveries.
LOTS:
AREA: The minimum lot area, width and depth shall not be less than that
established by the City Zoning Ordinance in effect at the time.
Page 28
1004.302
1004.303
1004.304
1004.305
1004.306
1004.307
1004.308
1004.309
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
CORNER LOTS: Comer lots for residential use shall exceed the minimum.
width and area requirements in the Zoning Use District by twenty percent
(20%) to permit appropriate building setback from both streets as required
in the Zoning Ordinance.
SIDE LOT LINES: Side lines of lots shall be approximately at right angles
to street lines or radial to curved street lines.
FRONTAGE: Every lot must have frontage on an approved street other than
an alley. All lots, with the exception of townhouse lots, must meet the
minimum lot width requirements of the Use District as required in the City
Zoning Ordinance.
SETBACK LINES: Setback or building lines shall be shown on all lots
intended for residential use and shall not be less than the setback required
by the City Zoning Ordinance, as may be amended.
FEATURES: In the subdividing of any land, due regard shall be shown for
all natural features, such as tree growth, watercourses, historic spots or
similar conditions which, if preserved, will add attractiveness and stability
to the proposed development.
LOT REMNANTS: All remnants of lots below minimum lot size left over
after subdividing of a larger tract must be added to adjacent lots, rather
than allowed to remain as unusable parcels.
POLITICAL BOUNDARIES: No singular plat shall extend over a political
boundary or school district line without written notification to affected
units of government.
FRONTAGE ON Two STREETS: Double frontage, or lots with frontage on
two (2) parallel streets shall not be permitted except where lots back on
collector or arterial streets, County or State highways, or where
topographic or other conditions render subdividing otherwise
unreasonable. Such double frontage lots shall adhere to, the following
requirements:
(1) Lot Depth: Double frontage lots shall have an additional depth of at
least twenty feet (20') in order to allow space for screen plantings
and/or buffering along the back lot line. To ensure adequate depth for
such buffering, the following minimum depth requirements shall be
required for double frontage lots:
District Minimum Lot Depth
R-l 160 feet
R-2 120 feet
(2) Buffering/Screening: All bufferyard requirements as regulated by the
Zoning Ordinance must be satisfactorily met.
Page 29
1004.310
1004.311
1004.312
1004.400
1004.401
1004.402
1004.403
1004.404
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
TURN-ARoUND ACCESS: Where proposed residential lots abut a collector
or arterial street, they shall be platted in such a manner as to provide turn-
around access and egress on each lot. This access and egress must be
identified on the grading pl~ for. the subdivision.
BUFFER SIDE YARDS:
(1) In the case of side yards involving single-family residential lots
abutting major collector or arterial streets, lot widths shall be
increased at least ten feet (10') above the minimum lot width for the
purpose of establishing buffers along the lot line bordering such
streets.
(2) Buffering or side yards bordering major collector or arterial streets
shall comply with the requirements as established by the Zoning
Ordinance.
IRREGULARLY SHAPED LOTS: On single-family residential lots
determined to be irregular in shape (e.g., triangular), the developer shall
demonstrate to the City an ability to properly place principal buildings and
accessory structures upon the site that are compatible in size and character
to the surrounding area.
STREETS AND ALLEYS:
CONTINUOUS STREETS: Except for cul-de-sacs, streets shall connect with
streets already dedicated in adjoining or adjacent subdivisions, or provide
for future connections to adjoining unsubdivided tracts, or shall be a
reasonable projection of streets in the nearest subdivided tracts. The
arrangement of thoroughfares and collector streets shall be provided in a
manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Dedicated streets shall
be constructed to the property boundary ofthe subdivision.
LOCAL STREETS: Local streets should be designed so as to discourage
their use by nonlocal traffic.
STREET PLANS FOR FUTURE SUBDIVISIONS: Where the plat to be
submitted includes only part of the tract owned or intended for
development by the subdivider a tentative plan of a proposed future street
system for the unsubdivided portion shall be prepared and submitted by
the subdivider.
TEMPORARY CUL-DE-SAC: In those instances where a street is
terminated pending future extension in conjunction with a future
subdivision and there is more than two hundred feet (200') between the
Page 30
1004.405
1004.406
1004.407
1004.408
1004.409
1004.410
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
dead end and the nearest intersection, a temporary turn around facility.
shall be provided at the closed end. This temporary cul-de-sac must be
designed in conformance with cul-de-sac requirements and must be placed
inside a temporary roadway~ easement if located outside a street right of
way. The subdivider shall be required to provide security in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney for removal or restoration of the temporary
cul-de-sac as determined by the City.
PROVISIONS FOR RESUBDIVISION OF LARGE LOTS AND PARCELS:
When a tract is subdivided into larger than normal building lots or parcels,
such lots or parcels shall be so arranged as to permit the logical location
and openings of future streets and appropriate resubdivision, with
provision for adequate utility connections for such resubdivision.
STREET INTERSECTIONS: Streets shall be laid out so as to intersect as
nearly as possible at right angles, except where topography or other
conditions justify variations. The minimum angle of intersection of streets
shall be eighty (80) degrees. Local street intersections must have a
centerline offset of at least 280 feet. Local streets intersecting with a
collector or higher order street must have a centerline offset of at least 660
feet unless topographic or other conditions render the requirements of this
provision unreasonable.
SUBDIVISIONS ABUTTING MAJOR RIGHTS-OF-WAY: Wherever the
proposed subdivision contains or is adjacent to the right-of-way of a State
highway or thoroughfare, provision may be made for a marginal access
street approximately parallel and adjacent to the boundary of such right-of-
way, provided that due consideration is given to circulation design, or
provision may be made for a street at a distance suitable for the
appropriate use of land between such street and right-of-way. Such
distance shall be determined by the City with due consideration of the
minimum distance required for approach connections to future grade
separations, or for lot depths.
HALF-STREETS: Dedication of half-streets shall not be allowed unless
they are essential to the reasonable development of the subdivision and the
construction of half-streets shall conform with the requirements of these
regulations, or where it is found that it will be practical to require the
dedication ofthe other half when the adjoining property is subdivided.
RESERVE STRIPS: Reserve strips controlling access to streets are
prohibited.
STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SURFACE WIDTHS: Street right-of-way
and surface widths shall conform to the following standards:
Page 31
1004.411
1004.412
1004.413
1004.414
2/1/0111/9100
DRAFT
STREET DESIGN
Classifications Right-of-way (ROW) Street Widths in feet
(measured face of curb to face
of curb)
Principal or minor arterial As required by state or As required by state or county
county
Collector 80 - 100 feet 36-52 feet
Local 50-60 feet 28-32 feet
(1) Right-of-Way dedications, excluding turnaround area, may be reduced
from 60 to 50 feet, and pavement widths may be reduced from 32 feet
to not less than 28 feet in areas determined by the City to be
environmentally sensitive due to topography, forestation, wetlands
and/or proximity to the Shoreland District. The reduction in width
shall be made at the discretion of the City.
STREET SECTIONS: The street section shall comply with design standards
as set forth in the Public Works Design Manual. All street designs are
subject to the review and approval of the City.
DEAD-END STREETS PROHIBITED: Dead-end streets (temporary or
permanent) without cul-de-sac turnarounds are prohibited unless otherwise
provided in this Subdivision Ordinance.
CUL-DE-SACS:
(1) Criteria For Construction. Permanent cul-de-sacs are allowed only
where one or more of the following criteria have been met:
a. Area topography or other physical site conditions warrant a cul-de-
sac.
b. A through street is not physically feasible or desirable due to
environmental considerations.
(2) REQUIREMENTS: Permanent cul-de-sacs shall not be longer than five
hundred feet (500') measured to the centerline of the intersection and
including a terminal turnaround which shall be provided at the closed
end, with a right-of-way radius not less than sixty feet (60').
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA EXCEPTIONS: In areas determined
by the City to be environmentally sensitive due to topography, forestation
and/or wetlands, deviations to the design standards outlined in this Section
may be allowed, provided that such deviations are limited to the
following:
Page 32
1004.415
1004.416
1004.500
1004.501
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
(1) Pavement widths may be reduced from thirty-two feet (32') to no less.
than twenty-eight feet (28').
(2) The following standards are met:
a. All lots shall meef or exceed the minimum standards for the
applicable zoning district.
b. The curb cut opening on the street shall meet established
standards.
PRIVATE STREETS: Private streets shall only be permitted in Planned Unit
Developments that have homeowner associations approved by the City.
Private streets shall be platted as outlots, and shall be designed and
constructed in the same manner as public streets; provided, the street
pavement may be contained within the outlot and the balance of the street
right of way may be contained within adjacent easements, provided that the
combined width of outlots and easements shall not be less than the right of
way, pavement width and easement requirements for public streets.
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION: Streets within the City shall be dedicated
in accordance with their functional classification as designated within the
City's Comprehensive Plan.
SIDEWALKS AND MULTI-PURPOSE TRAILWAYS:
REQUIRED SInEW ALKSffRAILS.
(1) Sidewalks or trails shall be required for all new projects where a means of
pedestrian access from the development to schools, parks, churches,
business or industrial developments, adjacent neighborhoods, transportation
facilities, or for unusually long blocks is necessary in order to meet the
purpose and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and of this Section.
Section 1004.503 contains the guidelines for the location, installation and
maintenance of sidewalks within the City. The City Council shall make the
final determination of the type and location of sidewalks to be installed.
(2) Paved or concrete sidewalks or trails that may not strictly follow the street
may be permitted by the City Council. Bituminous material may not be
used for sidewalks or trails to be located within the front yards of residential
properties.
(3) Sidewalks or trails in common area or other locations away from streets
which are typically found in planned unit developments or cluster
developments generally should be integrated into the detailed area plan or
Page 33
1004.502
1004.503
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
layout permitting visual surveillance of the path from the street or nearby.
houses.
STANDARDS:
(I) Sidewalks shall be constructed of concrete, five feet (5') wide. An eight foot
(8') concrete sidewalk will be required in high density areas where safety is
a concern, including but not limited to, commercial and industrial areas,
multi-family areas and school zones.
(2) Sidewalks shall be located within a public right-of-way, public easement, or
common area, or at least one foot (1 ') inside of the right-of-way line. A
border area or grass strip located between the street edge of the sidewalk and
curb face shall be installed to provide a visual break between the paved
surface of the street and sidewalk; a suitable location for planting of
boulevard trees, landscape, snow storage, and provide pedestrian safety by
further moving the sidewalk from the road surface in accordance with the
Public Works Design Manual.
(3) A continuous sidewalk, without a grass strip will be required where the City
determines that turf maintenance will likely be a problem and pedestrian
traffic is considerable.
(4) Sidewalk street crossings shall be located at a point along the road that
offers adequate sight distance as determined by the City.
(5) Barrier curbs (vertical curbs) six inches (6") high shall be provided along
collector streets or streets located in commercial or industrial areas adjacent
to sidewalks to prevent vehicles from leaving the roadway, control drainage,
protect pavements edges and protect sidewalks, lawns, utilities signs and
street trees from encroachment by vehicles.
(6) Curb cuts and ramps shall be installed in accordance with the Public Works
Design Manual.
(7) When sidewalks cross streets, a treatment such as striping, landscaping
medians, colored or stamped concrete or signs to identify the crosswalk as
approved by the City, shall be installed by the Developer.
(8) In development projects that contain hills or steep topography, the sidewalk
pattern shall conform as closely as possible to the standards found herein
and to connecting walkways.
(9) Sidewalks may be narrower than otherwise required to fit the terrain when
approved by the City.
GUIDELINES FOR LOCATION, CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF
SIDEW ALKSfI'RAILS IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS.
Page 34
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
Local X
Minor X
Collector
M~M X
Collector
Minor X
Arterial
M~M X
Arterial
Principal X
Arterial
* Other jurisdictions such as MN DOT or Scott County
1004.504
1004.600
1004.601
1004.602
1004.603
Subdivider Owner / City
Subdivider Owner / City
City / * Owner / City
City / * Owner / City
City / * Owner / City
City / * Owner / City
ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES.
(2) If improvement is not listed in the City CIP, the developer will be
responsible for cost and installation of sidewalk system.
(3) The City may require that sidewalks be installed on local streets or on
one side of a minor collector when a trail also serves the street or where
topographical or traffic conditions warrant.
EASEMENTS:
WIDTH ANn LOCATION: An easement for utilities at least ten feet (10')
wide shall be provided along all lot lines. If necessary for the extension of
watermain, sewer lines, stormwater sewer lines, drainage, and other
utilities, easements of greater width may be required along lot lines or
across lots.
CONTINUOUS UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATIONS: The design and location
of utility easements shall connect with easements established in adjoining
properties. These easements, when approved, shall not thereafter be
changed without the approval of the City Council after a public hearing.
EXCLUSION FROM MINIMUM LOT AREA: Easements established over
major drainageways, wetlands, waterbodies, road right-of-ways, and
regional utility/pipeline easements shall be excluded from the calculation
Page 35
1004.604
1004.700
1004.800
1004.900
1004.901
1004.902
2/1/0111/9100
DRAFT
of minimum lot areas as defined by the Subdivision Ordinance and by the .
provisions ofthe Zoning Ordinance.
OUTLOT ALTERNATIVE: . The. City may require outlots rather than
easements for wetlands, drainage areas, temporary cul-de-sacs and other
features, when these features will be owned and maintained by the City.
The subdivider is responsible for providing the City with a recorded
warranty deed, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for the outlot and
for all taxes on the outlot. A recorded copy of this deed shall be delivered
to the City immediately upon recording ofthe final plat.
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL: The design of erosion and
sediment control structures and procedures shall be in conformance with
the provisions ofthe City Public Works Design Manual.
STORM DRAINAGE: All subdivision design shall incorporate
provisions for storm water runoff consistent with the Public Works Design
Manual and the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan.
PROTECTED AREAS: Where land proposed for subdivision is deemed
environmentally sensitive by the City due to the existence of features
including, but not limited to, wetlands, drainageways, watercourses, areas
subject to flooding, significant trees, steep slopes or wooded areas, the
design of said subdivision shall clearly reflect all necessary measures of
protection to ensure against adverse environmental impacts.
Based upon the necessity to control and maintain certain sensitive areas,
the City shall determine whether said protection will be accomplished
through lot enlargement and redesign or dedication ofthose sensitive areas
in the form of outlots.
In general, measures intended to protect the designated areas shall include
design solutions which allow for construction and grading involving a
minimum of alteration to sensitive areas. Such measures, when deemed
appropriate by the City, may include, but shall not be limited to, the
following:
(1) The establishment of easements and/or outlots over wetlands,
drainageways and watercourses.
(2) The implementation of flood control measures.
(3) The enlargement oflots or redesign of the subdivision.
Page 36
1004.903
2/1/0111/9100
DRAFT
(4) The utilization of appropriate erosion control measures subject to
approval by the City.
(5) Soil testing to determine the ability of the proposed subdivision to
support development.
(6) The limitation of development on slopes steeper than thirty (30)
percent.
(7) Structure conformance to the natural limitations presented by the
topography and soil so as to create the least potential of soil erosion.
(8) The implementation of slope stabilization measures.
(9) The establishment of a buffer zone around wetlands as outlined in
Section 1004.703.
BUFFER ZONE REQUIREMENT.
(1) A twenty (20) foot buffer zone shall be required around wetlands in
new subdivisions. No grading will be allowed within the required
buffer zone except as follows:
a. When a water quality/stormwater detention pond is constructed
adjacent to the wetland.
b. When grading is necessary to enhance or improve the quality of
the wetland.
(2) In the event the buffer zone area is graded, it shall be seeded or
planted with native wetland vegetation.
Page 37
1004.1000
1004.1001
2/1/0111/9100
DRAFT
PARKLAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS: The owners of any
land being subdivided for residential, commercial, industrial or other uses or
as a planned unit development shall dedicate to the public for public use as
parks, playgrounds, trails o~ we~lands or public open space a reasonable
portion of the subdivided land. The City has determined the land dedication
requirement to be equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the gross area of a
subdivision. The amount of credit given for land to be dedicated shall be
based upon the land characteristics and in accordance with the following
schedule:
I DEDICATION SCHEDULE I
Land Characteristic Dedication Credit
Dry upland with undisturbed topsoil and slopes 100%
not exceeding 10%
Land which the Developer has provided a 100%
minimum of 4" of topsoil, graded and does not
exceed 10% slopes
Unstable land with poor soils and slopes not 50%
exceeding 10%
Virgin woodswith slopes less than 10% 50%
Virgin woods with slopes which are greater than 25%
10%
Dry upland with undisturbed topsoil and slopes 25%
of 10-20%
Unstable land with poor soils and slopes greater 0%
than 10% or wetlands, N.U.R.P. ponds, and
water retention areas which are deemed not
suitable for park purposes
LAND PREPARATION.
(1) Dedicated land shall be made suitable by the developer for its intended
use as parks and playgrounds, trails, or public open space. The City
shall determine the final condition of the land that is to be dedicated and
the Developer shall be responsible for grading, topsoil, turf
establishment, and construction of any trails unless otherwise directed
by the City.
(2) The City further reserves the right not to accept land that in its
discretion is not useable for the aforedescribed purposes, does not
Page 38
1004.1002
1004.1003
1004.1004
1004.1005
1004.1006
1004.1007
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
provide park facilities in the locations set forth in the City's.
Comprehensive Plan, or land that would require extensive expenditures
on the part of the public to make them useable.
At the City's option, the subdivider shall contribute an equivalent amount in
cash, or in cash and land, in lieu of all or a portion of the land which the City
may require such owner to dedicate pursuant to subsection 1006.801 above.
The cash amount shall be based on the fair market value of the land
reasonably required to be dedicated, with said value being determined no
later than at the time of final plat approval.
Whenever the term "dedicate" is used in this Section, it shall mean a
dedication to the City of land or cash, or some combination thereof,
whichever the City, at its option, shall require. The dedication shall be made
prior to the City's release of the fmal plat for filing.
In instances where cash is required in lieu of land, payments as required by
this Section shall be made prior to the release of the final plat to the
subdivider. The cash portion of the calculation shall be made as follows:
10% of the value of the land per acre as determined by the City, times the
gross acreage of the plat.
Where the subdivider provides neighborhood park amenities such as, but not
limited to, tennis courts, ball fields, open space or other recreational
facilities, for use by the public, the City may reduce the amount ofland to be
dedicated or the cash contribution in lieu of such dedication by an amount
equivalent to the documented cost of the facilities provided. Amenities that
are provided by the subdivider must meet the specifications of the City and
other standards as the City may require. If this provision applies, the City
shall determine the value of the amenity and adjust the dedication to reflect
said value.
Prior to the dedication of such land for public use, the subdivider shall
deliver to the City a title opinion addressed to the City, and in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney, as to the condition of the title of such
property, or in lieu of a title opinion, a title insurance policy from a title
company acceptable to the City insuring the required public interest in the
dedication therein.
Immediately upon filing of the final plat or other appropriate subdivision
documents, the subdivider shall file for recording all easements, deeds or
other conveyances of property required as a condition to the subdivision plat
approval, and provide evidence to the City. No building permits shall be
issued to any lot or parcel in said plat until all such documents have been
executed and filed.
Page 39
1004.11 00
1004.1200
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
MINIMUM DESIGN FEATURES: The design features set forth in the
Subdivision Ordinance are m.inimum requirements. The City may impose
additional or more stringent requirements concerning lot size, streets and
overall design as deemed appropriate considering the property being .
subdivided.
ZONING ORDINANCE CONSISTENCY: Preliminary and final plats
shall only be approved if they are consistent with the City's Zoning
Ordinance. Preliminary plats shall not be approved prior to adoption of
any pending rezoning application, any pending rezoning initiated by the
City or any other Zoning Ordinance changes necessary for final plat
approval.
Page 40
1005.100
1005.200
1005.300
1005.400
1005.500
1005.600
1005.700
1005.800
1005.900
1005.100
1005.101
1005.102
1005.103
1005.104
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
1005 REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS
GENERAL PROVISIONS
MONUMENTS
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
FUTURE STREET IMPROVEMENTS
SANITARY SEWER AND WATER DISTRIBUTION IMPROVEMENTS
STORM WATER IMPROVEMENT CHARGE
EXCEPTIONS
PUBLIC UTILITIES
ELECTION BY CITY To INSTALL IMPROVEMENTS
GENERAL PROVISIONS
ASSESSMENT POLICY: The City of Prior Lake Assessment Policy is
hereby adopted and incorporated into this ordinance by reference.
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT: Before a final plat is signed by the City, the
subdivider shall pay all applicable fees and enter into the City's
standardized development contract setting forth the conditions under
which the plat is approved.
SECURITY: Before a final plat is signed by the City, the subdivider shall
also furnish the City financial security in the form of an irrevocable letter
of credit. The irrevocable letter of credit shall be from a Minnesota
institution and in a form approved by the City Attorney. If the subdivider
fails to perform any obligations under the development contract, the City
may apply the security to cure the default.
DEVELOPER INSTALLED IMPROVEMENTS: If the developer is going to
install the public improvements, the required security shall be one hundred
and twenty-five percent (125%) of the sum of the following fixed or
estimated costs:
(1) Utilities.
(2) Streets.
(3) Erosion control.
(4) Landscaping.
(5) Storm sewer connection charges.
(6) Monumentation
(7) As-built/Record drawings
Page 41
1005.105
1005.106
1005.107
1005.108
1005.200
1005.201
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
CITY INSTALLED IMPROVEMENTS: If the City is going to install the public
improvements, the required security shall be one hundred and twenty-five
percent (125%) of the sum of the following fixed or estimated costs:
(1) Principal amount of special assessments for public improvements to be
installed.
(2) Street lights.
(3) Erosion control.
(4) Landscaping.
(5) Monumentation
W ARRANTY!MAINTENANCE BOND: The City shall require the subdivider
to submit a warranty bond in the amount equal to the original cost of the
improvements. The required warranty period for materials and
workmanship for public utilities shall be two (2) years from the date of
final acceptance. The required warranty period for materials and
workmanship for streets shall be one year following final acceptance of
the final bituminous wearing surface. The required warranty period for
sod, trees and landscaping is one year following acceptance of the
landscaping.
REPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS: Reproducible as-built drawings of all
required improvements shall be furnished to the City by the subdivider.
Such as-built drawings shall be certified to be true and accurate by the
registered engineer responsible for the installation of the improvements.
The subdivider shall also furnish such plans in an electronic format
acceptable to the City.
IMPROVEMENTS: All of the required improvements to be installed under
the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance shall be approved by and
subject to inspection by the City. All of the City's expenses incurred as
the result of the required improvements shall be paid either directly or by
reimbursement to the City by the subdivider. .
MONUMENTS:
OFFICIAL MONUMENTS: Official monuments, as designated and adopted
by the County Surveyor's office and approved by the County District
Court for use as judicial monuments, shall be set at each comer or angle
on the outside boundary of the final plat or in accordance with a plan as
approved by the City. The boundary line of the property to be included
Page 42
1005.202
1005.203
1005.300
1005.400
1005.500
2/1/0111/9/00 I
DRAFT
with the plat shall be fully dimensioned, all angles of the boundary'
excepting the closing angle shall be indicated and all monuments and
surveyor's irons shall be indicated. Each angle point of the boundary
perimeter shall be so monum~nte~.
PLACEMENT: Survey monuments shall be placed at all block and lot
comers, angle points, points of curves in streets or at intermediate points
as shall be required by the City. The monuments shall be of such material,
size and length as required by the City. It shall be the subdivider's
responsibility to ensure the survey monuments are maintained in good
order during construction and development.
SECURITY: To ensure all survey monuments are correctly in place
following the final grading of a plat and construction of utilities, financial
security will be required. Proof of the second monumentation shall be in
the form of a surveyor's certificate and this requirement shall be a
condition of a certificate of occupancy as provided for in the City Zoning
Ordinance.
STREET IMPROVEMENTS: All streets shall be improved in
accordance with the standards and specifications for street construction as
required by the City Public Works Design Manual.
FuTURE STREET IMPROVEMENTS: As a condition of plat approval, when
property being platted is adjacent to an existing collector street, highway,
or substandard streets which need improvement, the developer shall
dedicate land for the widening or improvement of said collector street,
highway or substandard street. In accordance with the City's Assessment
Policy, an acreage fee for the collector street system is to be collected as
part of the Development Contract on all new subdivisions. The fees are
dedicated to the Collector Street Fund and are to be used for the purpose of
reimbursement of excess right-of-way, collector street improvements and
pedestrian trail improvements associated with state aid streets and the City
share of county road related trail improvements. The charge shall be
based upon the gross acreage of the subdivision less the area to be
dedicated to the City for ponding, parks, wetlands, and public rights-of-
way. The fee shall be set by the City Council and paid to the City prior to
the release ofthe final plat.
SANITARY SEWER AND WATER DISTRIBUTION
IMPROVEMENTS: Sanitary sewers and water facilities shall be
installed in accordance with the standards and specifications as required by
Page 43
1005.600
1005.700
1005.800
1005.900
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
the City Council and subject to the approval of the City. In accordance
with the City's Assessment Policy, an acreage charge, dedicated to the
Trunk System Reserve Fund, will be collected as part of the Development
Contract on all new subdivi~ions.. The pwpose of this fund is to pay for
central system improvements essential for the functional operation of the
entire municipal sewer and water system. The charge shall be based upon .
the gross acreage of the subdivision less the area to be dedicated to the
City for ponding, parks, wetlands, and public rights-of-way. The fee shall
be set by the City Council and paid to the City prior to the release of the
final plat.
STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT CHARGE: In accordance with
the City's Assessment Policy, a charge for trunk storm water
improvements, either constructed or to be constructed for trunk facilities
serving the subject property, will be collected as part of the Development
Contract for all new subdivisions. The charge shall be based upon the
gross acreage of the subdivision less the area to be dedicated to the City
for ponding, parks, wetlands, and public rights-of-way. The subdivision
will be given a credit for anyon-site storm water improvement that has
been oversized to serve property outside the subdivision. The charge shall
be paid to the City prior to the release of the final plat.
EXCEPTIONS: Property being replatted shall be exempt from the
requirements of Sections 1005.400, 1005.500 and 1005.600 if the charges
were paid or assessed in conjunction with the initial platting of the
property.
PUBLIC UTILITIES: All public utilities, including, but not limited to,
telephone, electric, cable and/or gas service lines shall be placed
underground in accordance with the provisions of all applicable City
ordinances.
ELECTION BY CITY TO INSTALL IMPROVEMENTS: It is the
subdivider's responsibility to install all required public improvements
except that the City reserves the right to design and/or install all or any
part of the improvements, including trunk facilities, required under the
provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
chapter 429, as amended. If the City elects to install the improvements the
City shall require the developer to post an irrevocable letter of credit
guaranteeing payment of the assessments.
Page 44
1006.100
1006.200
1006.300
1006.100
1006.101
1006.102
1006.103
1006.104
1006.200
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
1006 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
NONPLA TTED SUBDIVISIONS
VARIANCES, PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS, STANDARDS
VIOLATIONS AND PENALTY ~
NONPLATTED SUBDIVISIONS
REGISTERED LAND SURVEYS: All registered land surveys in the City
shall be processed in the same manner as a combined preliminary and final
plat application. In accordance with the standards set forth in the
Subdivision Ordinance for combined preliminary plat and final plat
applications, the Planning Commission shall first approve the
arrangement, sizes and relationships of proposed tracts in such registered
land surveys, and tracts to be used as easements or roads should be so
indicated. Unless a recommendation and approval have been obtained
from the Planning Commission and City Council respectively, in
accordance with the standards set forth in the Subdivision Ordinance,
building permits will be withheld for buildings on tracts which have been
so subdivided by registered land surveys and the City may refuse to take
over tracts as streets or roads or to improve, repair or maintain any such
tracts unless so approved.
CONVEYANCE By METES AND BOUNDS: No division of one or more
parcels in which the land conveyed is described by metes and bounds shall
be recorded if the division is a subdivision, as defined by the Subdivision
Ordinance. Building permits will be withheld for buildings or tracts that
have been subdivided and conveyed by this method and the City may
refuse to take over tracts as streets or roads or to improve, repair or
maintain any such tracts.
EXCEPTIONS: The provisions of Section 1006.102 do not apply if the land
described in the conveyance is a parcel of land at least 5 acres and having
a width of at least three hundred feet (300').
COUNCIL RESOLUTION WAIVING REQUIREMENTS: In any case in which
compliance with the foregoing restrictions will create an unnecessary
hardship and failure to comply will not interfere with the purpose of this
Section, the Council may waive such compliance by the adoption of a
resolution to that effect and the conveyance may then be filed.
VARIANCES, PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATIONS, STANDARDS:
Page 45
1006.201
1006.202
1006.203
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
FINDINGS: The Planning Commission may recommend a variance from.
the minimum standards of the Subdivision Ordinance (not the procedural
provisions) when, in its opinion, undue hardship may result from strict
compliance. In recommeQ.ding any variance, the Commission shall
prescribe any conditions that it deems necessary to or desirable for the
public interest. In making its recommendations, the Planning Commission
shall take into account the nature of the proposed use of land and the
existing use of land in the vicinity, the number of persons to reside or
work in the proposed subdivision and the probable effect of the proposed
subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. A variance shall only
be recommended when the Planning Commission finds:
(1) That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the
property such that the strict application of the provisions of the
Subdivision Ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable
use of his land.
(2) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare or injurious to other property in the territory
in which property is situated.
(3) That the variance is to correct inequities resulting from an extreme
physical hardship such as topography.
(4) After considerations of the Planning Commission recommendations,
the City Council may grant variances, subject to subsections 1, 2, and
3 immediately above.
The provisions of Section 1006.201 apply only to variances to the
provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. Variances to the provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance including, but not limited to, setbacks, lot area and
lot width, must be processed according to the provisions of Section
1108.400 of the Zoning Ordinance.
PROCEDURES:
(1) Requests for a variance or appeal shall be filed with the City on an
official application form provided by the City. Such application shall
be accompanied by a fee as established by City Council resolution.
Such application shall also be accompanied by ten (10) copies of
detailed written and graphic materials necessary for the explanation of
the request.
Page 46
1006.300
1006.301
1006.302
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
(2) Upon receiving said application, the application, along with all related.
information, shall be referred to the City Planning Commission for a
report and recommendation to the City Council.
(3) The Planning Department shall set a date for a public hearing. Notice
of such hearing shall be published in the official newspaper at least ten
(10) days prior to said hearing, and individual property notices shall be
mailed not less than ten (10) days nor more than thirty (30) days prior
to the hearing to all owners of property within five hundred feet (500')
of the parcel included in the request.
(4) Failure of a property owner to receive said notice shall not invalidate
any such proceedings as set forth within the Subdivision Ordinance.
(5) The Planning Commission shall make a finding of fact and
recommend such actions or conditions to the City Council relating to
the request as it deems necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of
the Subdivision Ordinance.
(6) The City Council shall not grant a variance until it has received a
report and recommendation from the Planning Commission and the
City staff or until sixty (60) days after the first regular Planning
Commission meeting at which the request was considered.
(7) Upon receiving the report and recommendation of the Planning
Commission, the City Council shall make findings of fact and impose
any conditions it considers necessary to protect the public health,
safety and welfare.
(8) The City Council shall decide whether to approve or deny a request for
a variance or an appeal within thirty (30) days after the public hearing
on said request.
(9) A variance of the Subdivision Ordinance shall be by majority vote of
the full City Council.
VIOLATIONS AND PENALTY:
PENALTY: Anyone violating any of the provisions of the Subdivision
Ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each month during which
compliance is delayed shall constitute a separate offense.
SALE OF LOTS FROM UNRECORDED PLATS: It shall be a misdemeanor to
sell, trade, or otherwise convey any lot or parcel of land as a part of, or in
Page 47
1006.303
1006.304
2/1/0111/9/00
DRAFT
conformity with any plan, plat or replat of any subdivision or area located,
within the jurisdiction of the Subdivision Ordinance unless said plan, plat
or replat shall have first been recorded in the Office of the Recorder of
Scott County.
RECEIVING OR RECORDING UNAPPROVED PLATS: It shall be unlawful
for a private individual to receive or record in any public office any plans,
plats of land laid out in building lots and streets, alleys or other portions of
the same intended to be dedicated to public or private use, or for the use of
purchasers or owners of lots fronting on or adjacent thereto, and located
within the jurisdiction of the Subdivision Ordinance, unless the same shall
bear thereon, by endorsement or otherwise, the approval of the City
Council.
MISREPRESENTATIONS: It shall be a misdemeanor for any person owning
an addition or subdivision of land within the City to represent that any
improvement upon any of the streets, alleys or avenues of said addition or
subdivision or any sewer in said addition or subdivision has been
constructed according to the plans and specifications approved by the City
Council, or has been supervised or inspected by the City, when such
improvements have not been so constructed, supervised or inspected.
Page 48