The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMarch 26, 2001 " REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, MARCH 26, 2001 Fire Station - City Council Chambers 6:30 p.m. 1. Call Meeting to Order: 2. Roll Call: 3. Approval of Minutes: 4. Public Hearings: A. 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 1f4 mile north of CSAH 82. (Continued from the February 26,2001 meeting) B. Case File #01-010 - Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow grading and excavation for an access drive to Mystic Lake Casino on the property located on the west side of CSAH 83, approximately % mile south of CSAH 42 and 1f4 mile north of CSAH 82. C. Case File #01-017 - Mark Crouse is requesting variances for impervious surface and the ordinary high water mark for the construction of a deck on the property located at 15507 Calmut Avenue. D. Case Files #01-008 and 00-009 Centex Home is requesting a preliminary plat and Conditional Use Permit for 38.9 acres of vacant land located on the west side of CSAH 83, 1f4 mile south of CSAH 42, in the East Y2 of the NW Y4 of Section 28, Township 115 North, Range 22 West. The proposal is to create 54 single family lots and to approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow a cluster development of 68 townhouses. (Continuedfrom the March 12, 2001 meeting) 5. Old Business: None L:IOl fileslO I plancommlOl pcagendalAG032601.DOC 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ,; 6. New Business: A. Case File #01-013 - Wensmann Realty is requesting a vacation to an existing 10 foot wide drainage and utility easement in Wensmann's First Addition on CSAH 82. B. Case File #01-018 - Shamrock Development, Inc. is requesting a vacation to an existing 10 foot drainage and utility easement across Outlot A of The Wilds Second Addition. 7. Announcements and Correspondence: 8. Adjournment: LIO I fileslOlplancommlOI pcagendalAG032601.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, MARCH 12,2001 1. Call to Order: Chairman V onhof called the March 12, 2001, Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Criego, Lemke, Stamson and Vonhof, Planning Director Don Rye, 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 February 26,2001, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. Commissioner V onhof read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting. 4. Public Hearings: A. 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 of 25.58 acres to be subdivided into 78 lots for townhouse units on the property located on the west side ofCSAH 21 approximately Y.i mile north ofCSAH 82. (Continuedfrom the February 26, 2001 meeting) Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier stated the City received a request from the developer to continue this matter to March 26, 2001. MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO MARCH 26, 2001. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. B. Case Files #01-008 and 00-009 Centex Home is requesting a preliminary plat and Conditional Use Permit for 38.9 acres of vacant land located on the west side of CSAH 83, % mile south of CSAH 42, in the East Yz of the NW % of Section 28, Township 115 North, L:\OI files\OJ plancomm\Olpcminutes\mn03J20J.doc 1 Planning Commission March 12, 2001 Range 22 West. The proposal is to create 54 single family lots and to approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow a cluster development of 68 townhouses. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated March 12,2001, on file in the office of the City Planner. Centex Homes and John O'Loughlin have filed an application to develop the property located on the west side ofCSAH 83, 1;4 mile south ofCSAH 42, in the East ~ of the Northwest ~ of Section 28, Township 115 North, Range 22 West. The request includes the following: . Approve a Conditional Use Permit for a cluster development; . Approve a Preliminary Plat. The proposal calls for a mixed-use development consisting of a total of 122 dwelling units on 33.87 net acres, for a total density of 3.6 units per acre. The proposed development includes 54 single family dwellings and 68 dwelling units in 17 four-unit buildings. The development also includes private open space and a public park. Centex Homes is the developer of this project. John O'Loughlin, the current property owner, has also signed the application. There are several outstanding issues pertaining to this proposed development. These include the following: 1. The property has not been rezoned from the A (Agricultural) district. The City Council will not make a decision on this rezoning until April 2, 2001, at the earliest. 2. The plan does not provide for the extension of streets and utilities to the adjacent undeveloped properties. As noted earlier, it is not practical to extend a street to the west; however, the street must be extended to the north. It may also be possible to provide a connection to the SMDC property to the south. 3. Three of the four proposed cul-de-sacs exceed the maximum lengthof500 feet. 4. The proposed parkland consists primarily of a wetland, a storm water pond and steep slopes. The remaining area is a narrow strip of land that will not provide a usable park. 5. The plan does not address the issue of slopes 20% or greater. This plan does not make any attempt to preserve those slopes. The outstanding issue pertaining to this development will require major redesign of the proposal. The current design is not consistent with the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance requirements. In addition, the development proposal is premature until the rezoning issue has been decided by the City Council. The staff therefore recommends denial of this proposal. L:\O I files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mn03 I 20 I .doc 2 Planning Commission March 12, 2001 Comments from the public: Steve Ach, Centex Homes, said they do not have a presentation for the Commission and are trying to work through staffs concerns and issues. He did not feel the zoning would be a condition of denial. The concept plan does not show a street connection to the north, but if that is the wishes of the Council, they will make the connection. Ach met with Stan Ellison from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community who felt there was not enough right-of-way to make a connection to the west. Ach also mentioned they have changed the slab on grade townhomes to have basements. Ach questioned what kind of park is the Commission looking at? Centex is considering a centralized park area. Overall Ach felt they would work out the park issue. The soil tests indicated the area was not erodible and would not be a problem. The applicant is working on addressing the slope issue but does not have the plan down. The new proposal will allow more open space. The floor was closed. Comments from the Commissioners: Atwood: . It seems dual tracked. The Commission does not know what the City Council is looking at for zoning. . Likes the open space. . Questioned Outlot A and the surrounding development. Kansier responded staff did not know what the City Council's zoning intent. . The proposed park as is stands now is not a plus for the area. There are no trails or sidewalks. . The cul-de-sac lengths need to be looked at. . Hard time letting this go through at this time. Stamson: . It is difficult to make a recommendation without the zoning information from the City Council. . Without some direction from the Council it is pointless to go through the process. . Questioned staff if the item can be tabled until information can be obtained from the Council. Kansier said a 60 day waiver would have to be signed by the developer. . Not comfortable making a recommendation. Criego: . Spoke on the slope issue. The area is agriculture - no trees. There is no natural beauty. Not concerned about removal of those particular slopes. It could provide more parks and trail space. . As it relates to park land, the applicant can provide more park land if required. L:\O I files\O I plancomm\O I pcminutes\mn03120 I.doc 3 Planning Commission March 12, 2001 . Questioned staff if there was any reason a walkway (dock) could cross the wetland. McDermott said the City discourages those because of maintenance. It would also involve a permit from the DNR. . Felt there could be something done with the trails. . Regarding the cul-de-sac issue - not sure based on the terrain what the applicant could do. Ach presented a proposal with the cul-de-sac connections (to the west). There would be grading problems. . Nick Polta, of Pioneer Engineering, responded he tried not to have excessive cutting. Tried to keep a lot of the natural exterior. Because of the severe grade, the homes were set in as shown on the proposal. . It is more or less a cost issue. Ach agreed. . The lots meet the R2 standards. . Looking at the alternatives would prefer the first proposal. . How to deal with the cul-de-sacs? That is the realistic issue. The engineering standards have to be met. . Does not have a strong negative feeling against the proposal. It does need more parks and trails; the cul-de-sac length has to be addressed and connection to the north must be made. . Would not recommend approval without City Council's recommendation on the zonmg. Lemke: . Agreed with Criego's comments. . Agreed the existing slopes are not a big issue. . Liked this proposal better than a dense development. V onhof: . Concurred with the Commissioners' comments. . This is premature until there is direction from City Council. . Agreed with Criego on the trails and sidewalks. . A park system has to be worked out within the development. . Ach presented a new concept plan (170 units) with more open space. There are advantages to this proposal as well. It has worked in other communities. It would be a POO proj ect. . Ach said they typically have sidewalks and can put them in. Atwood: . Questioned the applicant (Ach) ifhe would sign an extension waiver. Ach said Centex would agree to sign. They are in a time constraint with the landowner. He would like to go to the City Council with clear direction between now and April 2. Criego: . Did not like the plan. L:\Olfiles\OJ plancomm\OJpcminutes\rrm031201.doc 4 Planning Commission March 12, 2001 . Questioned why the applicant went with an 8 and 10 unit plan instead of 4 units. Ach responded they tried to get more open space. It is also a number game to get the best number of units. . Rather have the single and 4-unit buildings on this property. Stamson: . Agreed with Criego, liked the original plan and would like to continue the matter so the developer can work out some time limit with the staff. . It seems the Commission is comfortable with the proposal. Likes the single family homes better. MOTION BY ST AMSON, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO CONTINUE THE MATTER TO MARCH 26,2001, IN ORDER TO GIVE THE DEVELOPER TIME TO WORK OUT AN EXTENSION WITH CITY STAFF. Criego recommend the applicant consider the comments from the Commissioners. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. 5. Old Business: 6. New Business: A. 2000 Annual Variance Report Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman presented the Planning Report dated March 12, 2001, on file in the office of the City Planner. Sixteen applications with 24 variance requests were brought to the Commission in 2000. The new Zoning Ordinance, effective on May 1, 1999, incorporated several previous ordinance amendments, such as reduced side yards for nonconforming lots and the reconstruction of existing decks. These changes may account for the elimination of several variance requests. The new ordinance resulted in variance requests for building walls greater than 40 feet, eave! gutter encroachments, 15 foot minimum building separation, accessory structures, and driveway width at the property line. The Planning Commission addressed some of these requirements with ordinance amendments in the last year. In 2000, the City of Prior Lake also adopted five ordinance amendments that affected variance requirements. MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY LEMKE, TO ACCEPT THE REPORT. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. L\OI files\Ol plancomm\Olpcminutes\mn031201.doc 5 Planning Commission March 12. 2001 B. 2000 Annual Complaint Report Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman presented the Planning Report dated March 12, 2001, on file in the office of the City Planner. The City of Prior Lake experienced a decrease of thirty-six percent (36%) in complaints for the year 2000, compared with 1999. Zoning Ordinance complaints accounted for the highest percentage of violations this year (32), and included improper recreational vehicle parking, shed location and setbacks, vehicles parked in required yard areas, and improper signs. Code violations relating to property appearance and health issues, such as overgrown grass and weeds (25), storage of junk vehicles (24), improper refuse disposal (21), and storage of junk (11), accounted for almost 50% of all recorded violations. Most residents have great pride in their neighborhoods and communities, and feel an obligation to maintain a neat appearance on their respective properties, as well as the adjoining properties. Also, the unique nature of Prior Lake, Spring Lake and the surrounding Shoreland Districts create challenging issues regarding land use and code compliance. The main reason for a majority of Shoreland code violations appears to be the resident's lack of knowledge regarding these ordinances including impervious surface area requirements and excavating/filling on lots within the district. The following statistics summary begins with the total number of complaints received; the invalid complaints were then subtracted from the total. Upon inspection, invalid complaints were determined not to be code violations or were considered to be civil issues. The remaining number consists of the total apparent violations discovered upon inspection, including multiple or additional violations. The total number of violations is then displayed as code category subtotals. To date, 114 cases have been closed and 39 cases are pending. Three (3) of the pending violations have been referred to the Scott Joint Prosecution Association for court action, with no decisions at this time. In addition, seven (7) more pending cases appear to be headed for court action this year 2001. In 2000 the City received a total of one hundred fifty two (152) complaints. This amounts to a thirty six percent (36%) decrease when compared with two hundred and thirty eight (238) complaints in 1999. All complaint/violation categories declined except for animal control complaints, which increased from 8 to 15 in 2000. It appears the three main reasons for this dramatic decrease in complaints includes: 1) a dryer than normal rainfall year, and fewer overgrown grass and weed complaints; 2) the City's resolve to enforce the code on a permanent full time basis; and 3) the City's efforts to increase the residents awareness of the code enforcement program through the local newspaper and cable TV media. L:\01 files\OI plancomm\0Ipcminutes\mn03] 20] .doc 6 Planning Commission March 12, 2001 Comments from the Commissioners: Criego: . Questioned where the majority of complaints come from. Horsman responded complaints come from citizens. Vonhof: . Questioned ifthere were multiple complaints on locations? Horsman explained they were. MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO ACCEPT THE REPORT AND FORWARD ON TO CITY COUNCIL. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. 7. Announcements and Correspondence: Rye commented staffhas been directed to redesign the downtown redevelopment standards. Rye distributed the first draft ordinance for future review at the workshop on April 2. Criego said he would be out of town for the workshop. 8. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 7:38 p.m. Donald Rye Director of Planning Connie Carlson Recording Secretary L:\OI files\OI plan comm\O 1 pcminutes\mn03l20l.doc 7 t PLANNING REPORT PRESENTER: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: 4A CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL 'uSE PERMIT AND A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO i BE KNOWN AS REGAL CREST JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR _X_ YES _NO-N/A MARCH 26, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: 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, 'l4 .mile north of CSAH 82. The application includes the following requ~sts: . Approve a Conditional Use Permit for a cluster development; . Approve a Preliminary Plat. The original proposal called 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 acr~. 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 building~. The development also includes private open space. The Planning Commission considered this request at a public hearing on FebT4ary 12, 2001. The staff and the Planning Commission identified several issues pertainin~ to this development. The Planning Commission tabled this item until March 12,2001 tp allow the developer the opportunity to address the outstanding issues. The develo~er then requested this item be continued to March 26, 2001 to allow additional time to !address the issues. Owners of property within 500' were notified of the new hearing date. The developer submitted revised plans for this development on March 1, 200~. The following information is a summary of these plans. I PROPOSED PLAN 1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc4.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 .. Density: The revised plan proposes 74 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 3.1 units per acre. To reduce the number of units, the 3-unit building in the northwest comer of the site was eliminated. Additionally, one of the 3-unit buildings located on the south side of Jeffers Pass was downsized to a 2-unit building. Lots: The preliminary plat consists of 74 lots for the townhouse units. There are also 5 lots for the common open space. Buildine Styles: The proposed plan calls for a townhouse style development consisting of 2-, 3- and 4-unit buildings. Elevations of the buildings are attached to this report. The plan includes 5 two-unit buildings, 16 three-unit buildings and 4 four-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 'l'2 story buildings as well. All of the units have either double or triple car attached garages. The exterior materials are brick and steel siding. 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 and storm water pond. 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 be verified on the plans. Lot Coveraee: The R-1 district allows a maximum ground floor area of 0.30. The ground floor area proposed in this plan is 0.17. Useable Open Space: The R-1 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 5.6 acres of open space, or 3,296 square feet per unit. Parkine: The proposal provides at least 2 spaces per dwelling unit, which is consistent with the minimum Zoning Ordinance requirements. Based on the site plan, 26 units have two car garages, and 48 units have 3 car garages, providing 196 parking spaces. The plan does not provide any specific off-street guest parking, other than the areas located in the driveways. Landscapine: 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. 1 :\0 1 files\O 1 cup\regal crest\regal pc4.doc Page 2 .- The revised landscaping plan submitted lists the proper number of trees for the development; however, the actual count of trees on the plan indicates only 96 trees. The plan is generally 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 of2 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 does not indicate whether an irrigation system will be provided. Tree Replacement: The applicant has submitted an inventory identifying 6,743 caliper inches of significant trees on the site. Based on the revised plan, the proposal removes 7.1 % for road and utility purposes and 33% for building pads and driveways. This is a significant decrease from the original proposal, which removed 52.8% of the significant caliper inches for building pads and driveways. The removal of the 3-unit building in the northwest comer of the site and the relocation of the buildings on the south side of Thatcher Lane resulted in the saving of several trees. Tree replacement will be required. Since replacement is required at a rate of 1/2 caliper inch to 1 caliper inch removed, a total of 270.5 caliper inches must be replaced. This is equal to 109 trees at 2 1/2 caliper inches per tree. The landscaping plan identifies 233.5 caliper inches of replacement trees. It must be noted, however, that the plan utilizes weeping willow trees, which are not on the significant tree list. The plan must be revised to include the required number of replacement trees. Signs: This site plan does not include any project monument signs Lightin~: 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 Thatcher Lane, 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 CSAlI 21 across from Lords Street. Lauren Lane 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. 1:\01 files\Ol cup\regal crest\regaJ pc4.doc Page 3 .. 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. In addition, each unit will be subject to an $850 park support fee when a building permit is issued. 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 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 the east side of the site. The developer has revised the drainage plan so it is consistent with the watershed district requirements. Phasin2: This project is proposed to be completed in two phases beginning in 2001. The first phase consists of 33 units located on the east half of the site. The second phase includes the remaining 41 units. ISSUES: The staff and the Planning Commission originally identified 10 issues, listed below. The developer's response to these issues is listed in bold italics 1. The plans must be modified to remove the following units: a. Eliminate the units identified as Lots 6-8, Block 1, 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. The developer has eliminated the units identified as Lots 9-11, Block 2, rd Addition on the north side of the plat, one of the units on the north side of Street "A ", and shifted the units to preserve additional trees. This saves one stand of significant , trees at that location. The developer has also centered the temporary cul-de-sac and shifted the units to save trees on the south side of Thatcher Lane. 1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc4.doc Page 4 The units identified as Lots 6-8, Block 1, 2nd Addition, have been shifted to the north and west to preserve trees. This does not completely address the issue of preserving the 20% slope in that location. 2. Revise the landscaping plan and tree replacement plan to meet the mInImum ordinance requirements. In addition, an irrigation plan must be provided. A revised plan has been submitted; however, this plan does require some adjustment to meet the ordinance requirements. 3. Provide building elevations, including all sides of the building, and floor plans for all proposed building styles. Building elevations have been submitted. Floor plans for the buildings have not been submitted at this time. 4. Submit plans in a 50:1 scale to enable staff to verify setbacks. Plans in a 60:1 scale were submitted to make setback identification easier. 5. Provide street names for the public streets. Street names have been provided. 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 lOa-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 ofthe manholes on street 'A' (page 6) are labeled as Manhole 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. 1:\OIfi1es\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc4.doc Page 5 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. The plans have addressed some of these issues. 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. The plans identify a right-turn lane on CSAH 21. Specific plans for that lane must be submitted prior to final approval. 8. Obtain permit from the Watershed District. The Watershed District has reviewed the plans and has indicated that it complies with the Watershed District rules. A permit must still be obtained. . 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. 10. Provide an access to the open space from Jeffers Pass. An access to the open space has been provided. At the original public hearing, there was testimony about the access to this property from CSAH 21. Residents of the Windsong development on the east side of CSAH 21 were concerned that this access was not safe. The Scott County Highway Department has reviewed this access in more detail. In the attached letter, dated February 26, 2001, the County Highway Department has reiterated that this access meets or exceeds the minimum spacing and sight distance guidelines. The Highway Department has noted this access may not be ideal, but the County is required to provide reasonable access to this property . 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 1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc4.doc Page 6 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 and storm water sewer system 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. The use is similar to the approved Wensmann 1 sl development and will not have an adverse affect on 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, if necessary. (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 of the Zoning Ordinance. The landscape plan must be prepared and signed by a registered landscape architect. (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. 1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc4.doc Page 7 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 of the 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 appro~al 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-l" 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 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. 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 developme~t 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 revised proposal attempts to preserve many of the steep slopes by designating this area as common open space. Some additional modificatIOns to the plans, however, may improve the preservation of these slopes and preserve more 1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc4.doc Page 8 of the mature trees. This includes the removal of the unit identified as Lot 6, Block 1, 2nd Preliminary Plat: There are engineering issues pertaining to this preliminary plat that must still be resolved; however, these issues can be resolved prior to approval of the final plat. 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. 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. RECOMMENDATION: 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 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 unit identified as Lots 6, Block 1, 2nd Addition. 2) The landscaping plan and tree replacement plan must be modified to meet the minimum ordinance requirements. The landscaping plan must also be prepared and signed by a registered landscape architect. 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) The plans should be revised to combine more of the driveway openings, especially on Jeffers Pass. 5) Address the following comments from the City Engineer: (a) Submit a wetland replacement application. 1:\Olfiles\Olcup\regal crest\regal pc4.doc Page 9 (b) Provide an additional low point on Jeffers Pass, north of Thatcher Lane, to direct runoff into the southwest wetland on the property. (c) Maximum slope of grading in maintained areas is 4: 1. Some graded areas are shown with a greater than 3: 1 slope. Provide retaining walls as necessary to create 4: 1 slopes in maintained areas. (d) Refer to the Prior Lake Design Manual for preparation of plans and specifications. (e) Look at alternative ways of connecting to the existing sanitary sewer. (f) Catch basin 15 is located in a driveway. The driveway location must be moved. (g) The intersection of Lauren Lane and Jeffers Pass must be constructed in Phase 1 to eliminate the need for a temporary cul-de-sac. (h) The developer must obtain temporary construction easements where off-site grading is occurring. These easements must be provided to the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. (i) The street grade shall not exceed 2.00% for the first 100' approaching the intersection with c.R. 21. 6) 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. 7) Obtain a permit from the Watershed District. 8) 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. EXHIBITS: 1. Revised Site Plans, dated March 1, 2001 2. Revised Landscaping Plan dated March 8, 2001 3. Building Elevations, dated March 20,2001 4. Developer's Narrative, dated February 20, 2001 5. Letter from Scott County Highway Engineer, dated February 26,2001 1:\01 files\OI cup\regal crest\regal pc4.doc Page 10 ~~~nm~.~1 nmm am~~fi III Uml J ~oJeoil~,,~,rnmoil ~:~~~~~~ "~'~"1I i4~~S: 1I!l' i ~ 1 J T~ T . ~~n~;';;;; '!~:!il ~iu~=~ li' II ~~~~;.;; · q ~l &. ~~In D~~I~i ~~. ~litazi~~ I !u !.' i >>~< - ..::tQ.,R '" UII~fl~J ~. ~ ii' -.: ~o "Ei i ,~. f !i ~ R~ lili ~~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ ;5';1 =. :1 '_!.(~ In 0 B~ ~ ~- ~i gi>>~ ~~~;::E ~~~~~i ., ~ . - __~.__;&N! .~ p' ,,~.it "'" vI ,,"~1,1 til: ::t:... ~~.fo'!=I:'to> u: eir ~ ~ ~, II " ~~.~ -} ~~ Eilc. ~ p ." ~ri' '-'~ '. ~.~ ~- "f It. . ~ P" - ~~f~~~i! ~n Hi i ID ~~ "".~! - Ef,l .:!! ~ !l ! I i i' I PROPOSED ~SMAN 1ST ADD. SINGLE FAMILY PLAT rflROPllSi;p WENSMAN 1ST ADDITION " 1---' / TOWNHOUSE-- PLA T ./ I \ I ( ''------1-.-/ I > I II '!!!:~~ ........... m... I I / I ,p.~ r---I---'---i i ' ID- .. I'~ I I I I :1-- - - ~~:;;:",..-~~-l ~ A; ~L -~~~: Ii / ..: : I :1 ,/~ - ~~~ ". - ~~I ; I ~ , 1 l:l 1 l:l I :~. / t 2...;; P 1---- ~ I I I I 'I " '- . ID.. -.... L ..J I :. ""r. ~(.... .V ioo'~' ----1--- ---"1 :1. ''If' ~lQ\ ~ .._ ~ .I.!'T.R5PASS _ __ ---I l ____ OJ '-Ii ) n_ N :,''-.. C -=---:--- --=- - ---- '-." ~ I .<I.?T l... 'r --; , ':.." '-., '",,- I I{ , '11ft" +:. . - i I I .~ I ,.,,"-'......,:'-._ .~"'" __ ---- ~ ( L~'" ~ ~ 'I ~ N I - : .. , "-., '-. \"t~ ~ . ~ I a '''',' l"~ )) ~ '" 11 -.. T'N ~ I I : , u '\ ') '~~'-I ~. +- . . ~~... ~ t I _,.", ~ I -, 1& , \1 '" \ r I I ',....~ --:; I, li'\\ II: I -, ""-"",,-_ ~~.!) - ~ If '~ % .. ;r-~ ~ _..- -'-' Iq---......~/ Ii \ \ ~ ~ J -h-i~ ~..: "'? : I~ w \~, 'nJ ~'iS..t- 1 ,..-L,i"'. hi~ ~ ! :/il - ,\ ~-p .- -'-r.1- ' U-...J"A..r, l--r J=-- I J;l 'Ii!Jfifh::"'"-~~:_~~~:--,- --------- ~f ~~t 11. -I~':._.~ II ~.., j' - I ',..... m ) 1- /~ " . :>.. I _________ i r J 'JIJ ",\ ~ 0; / ~~;; ~ /I.rv p ~ ~ _~ '\ l~J-~:r -------~~~:.;;- I iptC ~ .J or \\~;~~..i'...~1jl: )f~~~~ '.~ 1 :L~:. ~ -------------- - : l=--- :~ -~RX .. ~'Jf:~~ R" -, rr ~ j. \ . ttr J5l; iii ~ : ~-~ ~~ \ '" / h ~~t>...!..Y, r-----".... & \~ :/;w!~ ~ ~ ~:/~)i'<:'."'" !!!o; :.. -- .~. ]hft-"I!l' ---.-.r'..jt>~ ~ I?>-<"" A -7';. .. -/' 2' I I -r"O i . ~ ,':!<t ~ '--<"~~O; " I l!-<>Q&'ri"'r'i1-' ht.= ',. · .:;. I '" ------- \...0< #, I "'=~;LP\.U f - V..., ~i -~ ~ L / I t-.) E~I'" ,,.L ;i "!"'1 ), ~~!i- ~/ 1~6 Ii "'r\:Vl]\. L N .... r'-1 I; I~''>. ;.. , , ... '+- r i:m ~ !i~ ~ Y i ~/~ ~>~l l...~ ~~~/~:ru i~ ~:: ~ - - i;, Jf l!;i'! 1 g~ '-~ R- r r: ~i", V/:-.-- ',' . '\ - 0 & ,->.i.",-J"""I t JAr-' &t l i! =, l .", '-r' ~ . "'.',./t/ ). Z _.'=!:..'\, ..1 Ul ., i.~~>fl ''i · o+- 'f ..~~~. ~Yf'/:,/ ili~Q~~ ,1,--:.,- '--__=-, I! \ ",. ' ! -- I .. ", I~'~a ~ Je I r' """1a-1 ' ~H)l i" .tL,i~ rLrt;:: b-I~ +- '" ~t 1~=8.~ I :: ! " . I., I - ~~!; t '-""t-LLv 'C/., ,-I tl ~g : , / ," I :. I I Kg. · r. q, --n.... z Y ~>"'" f i/ /' l:.?}~.._) fn I I I ~:; ~ '"I iN U"\r ~ -r-L. ~N .1 '---~~...., ,/ Ii I -~~ :: I :I~ '" i- WI~ ~~. i - . 1/ ----]..::.J,: i :;: i~ ! jl I ~ i> . ......... __ "::J.~' ~ 1~~eJ ),14 '_ ~ ! I P / I I " ",_.~_/..r;;1/1 .0...' [.clli il (,1 /(fl 1f-------1 ,1 ~ " I ii !;~~ ~ t~ : . J 'f(n--'-~~-~--~"\\ j' I,:i. // 'f:' ~ I~ l=-'='~h) I : K: I --'~"'" s. 5 I/L J ~ 'ii'i! I~~ '/ .~6 If------, ! 8/ I ('~.-;.;;;;:- _ ";~ . e".:t = _ ~ t . .!~U '~~ ~ . ..' L 1- I (......-) : 10 PttIOi~#t() OIS1 ..a. !; "".:.- - - - - ._.~.-t...-_.- I 2.0 (eDT. ,,:am) - I 1 ' E) d ;C-:::-~-I :t -.---.----- - - -{... ,,gz (..... Co.) : I : I .......- ~-,._- I r- -- - - . ::-..-... L:.'L _ ..__ J ILL __ (!!! . -'-.'7'- - m -- .LL#l>~~ __-+--~ ____J.~______ 'r.il!." ."- _0_.' -- -- .*'1 1 : TI I~ --I " -...." -- : REE AVE NE (CO. RD. 21) --::....-=-" :--"- .. .. -~...--_Jr---t__'!:"'_..__ __ __ __ r...I L_:~~;-: K . -4---...+-~~~ ",'I,' - - -::...-::... -.:: - - - - ,- - ---~ - - - - - - - -' - i ~ r -\ t~___________-l ftl ~~----~.... f! ~ _ _ \ ~ · f~.. r_ Ih ~. ..~~~... l&~.r.~oc""'n_"'_.." --- ~ ~ ZONED R-l ZONED R-l . '. 'fl ~I ..., , ZONED R-l \ ':z: I 11 ~ . '" I r. --+-\---.. \ ~, I I i,; i I _.. glglglglgl~ :::gggg~ ar,.....,....~......-I CJ1~V1t-.)-2 I 0 0) M - - - -u -=t.:o.:o.:u x- o~ !!.!ii ::3 CD _._._. O"O?~.~. ::3-, ::3::3 0..:: !!;>Q Q ~~ g,'<'< 0C5:i'S31 ~!:too = 0 (1)0 ;::;:...... III ::3 'tl'< ~ '0"0 -. :::0::3_10 CD '0 %~::3 31 00 0 CDIIl ::3 3 o' CD::3 ;::'0 o "0::3 ocr ::3Q. -0 o ::3 Piiri9 ~1I1 ~ . ~J I it . I;l(ql(l; r ~ t I ~ 1 I 1 . eo ~ ~ Ii; .., N.., 0... Z., "'111 0" .,., 10 -" ... ., ~ III ;:: o o z o > z " :0 o " !:l ~ n. K 8 ~ ~ ~ PREl.IL1INARY PI.A T /SI1E PLAN i I I ~ ..... ~ "- o g~' REGAL CREST 00 PRIQ~_~I':,--MIt::!!!I':SOT A ::::: =:'~:: ~-a.~... III H~ TERRA ENGINEERING, INC. ~=-~..~ --- 1/I/WI_,...CIl,_ V'~-,...OII_ ,.. ..n ~1PI.......ca,..___........__ -~- Data: ... ..... 14aot-C 1M .. &__,...,... - .r-- -::::- '/1',- ........ /I"i" _. /,,~/ lii;'~!!l ' -:--../' I~"'~ Je r' " t 1_llil ~ . : f . I~. 8 ill;! 8 I I' I '-,8, !. e; J jJ--'~:,;..J. / ,i i j/ -.'].>"' I '-". . / fl" l;~e: I · '_ i-l:~"';::'_L 110 il~ I I I ! ~ ~ " i l~~ ! ! . : p 'P. \ J ~W I )> ~ 'J Cl I - I I ~O 'il g ~1 i t~e, {t:2 iI _----"'!....... \. -.-.-.-' c=I _ _::::_.-.-.__._._._._.-.~ _ _ _ "~,,..,. 0 ~ .=-:::": .... ",.' ~ r;. ~ _ co.. ljl ...Jjl " . --;" .........~y c~"'. Iii 1::.r-;-r;.... .............tIll) _:_:I!.:!!:,&::_ ~~_p tVe ' ;1 ~ NOO""~ >>an t w_ 'J-- ~ _ __ __::.;- ___ ,_ ,_ .'!:_ ____ .. : EAGLE CREEK AVE. NE (CO. RD. 21) ~_~ w_ ~ I' -_____ ,.... .II...... t --;r~~-"'9<:~r--- - - - - - ---,----...----.2'....--'-i-S------~ . '!"------------' 'i' ~-..,----... ,I ;0 r q. r_ f"" a .....~~ DRMW'AYTOIlEIlDDO \ g . ...... \;., :g _.:.~, r,;."", 10 """" ....'-or....VI .. ZONED R-l". . "\ ~\ .... ... .. '!\. " ... ZONED R-l r I ~ ~ \ ~l :c, I: ~ U~i5fll~lPr..fl q 621~.if~lm~I'!I ~ i:l~nB~ l"i nb :2 !p Ef 5' i Ii) s:; P i ! ~ l! i fA rPROPllSF;,D WENSMAN 1ST ADDITION I PROPOSED ~~N 1ST ADD. SINGLE fAMILY PLAT / TOWNHOUSE-.~AT . /" I '\ ( '----.J./ I I ~~~ - -- I ) I " ~JiQ ;JiU1 II l\~"ll\ll\ f j t I i ! 1 - ,.'. ":,,J i ;i k1~ " ,,' l.li'[; ~~_..) '----' . .qJ"rHS ""55 it a ~ T I 1& I w 1 I ___.,... r 1 I I 1 ~ t '. ..... -------- --------===~~==- ........_S1IIIET --r....- .. 47 I l~i~_) : fr.!! j i:i~~J ~ 1;2.' L ~ a :.... J I:; ;u 1 511 : I ! f < ~ I ~ I I: ' P -------1 I I : 1~)..1:1-.) I : : , I ------1 I 11 I I : ~ / L I , (aM. 111IO) --1-1 : : I : I I I 1 .::i:.L .L -----t--- __ _____J.Ao...J<....---~ (COtT. 11>>20) (s.u c..) ZONED R-l ::.:::::::.= TERRA ENGINEERING, INC. J/a/fl4........... _-....... ~=~A~ ~ ~ l1ILI1Y PLAN =:::~~::: ~-..:-~~u. 5tooIe.,~. ~ . ~ o.-~ n. '- ... N::J 0'" z;u ...en 0" ;u;U 10 -" !3 ~ en ~ 0 (') z '" ~ " ;u 0 ! " r, l :u :! >i & ~ n. I JYD \ _..-t--_.~ ~-- : ~ ! ~: '"!"} _,.r...; r"..:) :l ~.~ ~. g~~ ~ ~~:I'I;f ~ ~!III' ~ ~ Ji l~ ~.!! ,d, o ., II , I ! ~iri!D p~ it!1 ~J i il J ~'11:\11 i' i' f ~ t I J . i E. ~ - ~ . x ~.! w , 1<; .... N... ~.~'" n. ,,"".~ a 0 ~ - ~ ~ GMIING./bIWWlE PlAN I ? ~ ~ ERCSUlN CON1ROI. PlAN U 0 '9- _u" REGAL CREST lJD PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA =::.::-......:.:::.:.,. ~..:...~~.. -..- gIn w.._.........:. S ! 2/lalM__...~_ ,. _ ... 1IH....___....Ql,.__......._ TERRA ENGINEERING. INC. 6/101 61...._ ":1.._ ~Is. HN~.. ~ 5W MrSI _4_ Dah; ....No.14M4 H~ a.. - t.. I ! I : :m I ! ~.. I I . .!. \,:! I / -lmn.-;;.iii)- - -1 '?: " ......f.-: .."..) I " i!: , ., ------1 I IS I I : ~! L _ .J- -, ! (COtT. IJMD) : I : I I I I .J.rl L -.J ~, '" _"""_ --+---~ ____J..~----~ TO _ --""...., -- ___"'........... 'I I~ ,!;...,.' ....,. :' - - __ ~:: _:_ _ _ W~ jl : --4---+~....~;:J-- ...~cr~ ---'!.",------ - - - - - - - -,- - - - ~~ w~ I L___:.~~~_~REE1< AVE. NE (CO. RD. 21) \ t ____-::: - - - - . _______-'_J '0 . !"----------- <j>' ~-.., -El. f~ I '" r ~.. r_ l~ · ....')>$":o.. \ ~ ZONED R-l." \!f; ~\ '\;<~ ZONED R-l ~ ~ n. ,!If;! \~ r:: :::J (tn~ l E!~~llmm~~1 It ~;lrk~IIHi$iI&~ i Ill~lli~ ~i ~ Ii C) If " ~ ! ~ E % fi rPllOPGS(o WENSlAAN 1ST ADDI110N I PROPOSED ~~ 1ST ADD. SINGLE FAMILY PLAT / TOWNHOU~~T // I \ ( '-___ I .../ I I ... ---1-- I ) -..~~ I I;ll'il\l\ l 'J i I 1 ! ~5 2~ ::I !f r . ~lin ~jUlI Ii ~;1"' ;j. ')j lrt~ \.-..O\i '-_./ ~ ell " .. a ~ ". .... " ........ """" ...... ---------- ------- ;a JTI JTI (J) c: :;0 ;;;j -< m -< N o z ,., o :0 !. L o :c z o r ~ :;0 P:> )> (J) (J) o ~ (CIJIl."~) 1s.l1 c..) z ~ ZONED R-l ~ . ~~ lo; N::J 0'" z;o ,.,111 0... ;0;0 '0 -~ n. :< ~ III s:: o n Z o ;; z ... ;0 o ... ,., :0 :< l O~ . ~,= ill ~. 'tREE PRESERVAlKlNj\m..ACEUENT PlAN :=;;~~.~ '/Ije1-,.DIJI- TERRA ENGINEERING. INC. "",,5 0- " 1.5 ~ E::-a~'" J/tsjflt_,.G1"'- ~"Le 0 g ~'REGAL CREST ~H Ol ~ --.-- . ...- ....06.__......... -.- -- - - -- - .-. ....---..........- C~U ~-:::.. - -.._-"'_..._".....-..~ I~ === I I DlloN ~~~~:::~=.=~sE. l'J'I' S 1'9111D~ ...~~, :::: w:".....:::: .-: - - -.."'- -"\""h_ t'lw I ~-r-1I ^-;J"""'1 - <"~\Not{ )-...L/? 3"J':a'l1 "? . t4 'V1J o. Q. ~w (J~lW"..\.. """.J,.. ..l-".:i-:;r-j.., "''Y''J~ ...." . ~ ". . 'rh'hT--- - ~~.- I I I I r - - - - ~-=-.'L_-~--~s~{"1!. -? I - J I "'.-- . ~ '. I I , A~,~J:\~flt ~'\",' . : 0 : . ~ ~ u~'" I..... ~, '")\J-j.. ... . \. . S<Y" ,....: ,L _ _ _ _1_ _ _ -.1_ _ _ _ I " \ j. I Ft PAtI '" >_ &~--- r--..---#f!~-___ " ' C-- ----..~ 0 ~"I' /::: --,. -- r __ I' .... '~ \ "~t:n.~ ,(/ :p" &..t I I I ~ ..... , ~ ~~ r '( ~~ - I 5 - I . · I 'f \. 'rf'.' I! I _ I · "\ ~.~ -.J.. /' I i' I I '>"~ '-j I ~ . i=rf1" J'" ~ _I : ,'-.. " 1\ ( I ./ 'F"-'L,~ .J. _~ ~j( 'I ' }~rr.\ ~r ----, , " " I . r' - ~I i ~ f' JI "I 1 ~ iSi ! I ! r t1M ~ wi -( I " r-- '. ,. I '" , -. :\ r: ~ E"'''' rl . " , , !:L -.~ ~ -,' . -.. ~ ' ....... ---..... f4,.. I Jl a;~\ '" ,~'Nt.i~ _ _' ,'\ ~-:-.:-""' -,>17' MJ;;f}1 "~ /~IlJ-~ ~~~ f:lJ/""J,) ~~...j, 1.:!l1,,'Jiy~ w I /~ 1(') cj ~jV~, :.J. I I ''oJ -.~" . ~ .r.. i,,",," /~ '-<r-bJ. 'r l, _ -1.lj:J;1 I \ ,.' ~ ~ I' ~/ '-, J. .r:;;: !:2..! I !~&"~ '1 n' l' -1l. ")) 'I ,~~ ~..___- ,)' I I Ii ,f'!< 'ra~y~'~ .!. '"'2:(.., 1P~JP Co ,.~ ! '""'l. f fu i , :< 1! . Ii; - -, ~ 'r ..,.1"); i~ 7(;. ) .~~l - ~ ~ J ~ 't !; .1 J I ~ T 4 i . I....,;} .., '4 ( , I>\. r' I.. ~. >'1 , IlIIli,. _ _ -1...-...._.., . ,:!o- I 11 "e" . I ;~, ! f~l 1'!IS9 ii : Ii' r ~~. ~ .......', f I ::~ II I I _, 1 II I @/ II I~' , .~~ rro:i~) 1(1 II :; I/! ~!"'" ! ( ~ ~ If " ~ _ _ _ _ _ _...j ,. , i. ,'I- 4 I' ; l~ _ II I' I' i (,'c ,II. :!~! t& {I II}-------, / i,' , " I. I 1\1 1 i f ~I f ~ I " _ f i .1 I . " ' II I I i2~1- 1'= :::::-..:=-- ~ I W '- - 1" 1 ! =-::;:; ,",,~I' .1 I ""':' 0 '5_ ~" '#"1'0 It I ~~- .r-- .:. ,. "'" - r-- - -lL- - -- - -'-- - +--=F1 N I . .. -.- .~ Ill.'''' 1 ~ A 1 - ",. ~_ _w.... ; A .;: I I II w_.--~_ r --_. - r- 't.:.. _ I I " -----.J '-~-" "T. - ..... I -.: II ..---- , " ! ~ J e II I, II II 'I I " I " I III II. I I ~ " ~,rr ]:(1 ~:~ ::: :rJ life --~ . '.' o i:;;;;i; , 1I!lEI I .... -< ;:::;;lEQI '"ll 0 1111'1 1> r- C 1111111. z In.' ::; Ed I i UU. ..., 0 I c z 0 1> I I 'Iim=i .... II nu,l (5 z Il,hlllll II nnd f I II I If ~. ii i= .' ,., ~ I! ill ill ~~'~:m !"a~r;~ II II! 01::.": .: n. II ~J ii II !! le...~ I .0 I en ,....,~J = 9 (if..~ 8-0 l- 'I -0 r- :J> z: ==1:1::: o --' I o G-J --' ::i n~~= [C I ~ f"0 = '" = 52 \! -I 11 I B \~ ~~ ~BE3 .. .. .. .. -'" ...- -....-... ri~ v' . . " '" ) " \~ -I II I \~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ 8 nl'l '.l( . ti! l!l . ',J iUH . f H Ii II I I I i I I ,I ~I "T] '" -I e . 1'1 Z \ r - .1'1-1 ,< I)>)> . -I t\) 1.0" o z 0 , " "?~o c1I'1N (A-I" o )> I I c:: :z: ~ ---l r J:> II' 1'0 Ii ~ "IFf Ii i [& . !l, ~ .~H Ip;QOt L 0;''' il flrl ii ifl I~ ~ I I ~I Cl'" I -Ie . 1'1 Z \ r - . 1'1 -I " ~ )> ~ -I N 10" o Z 0 : " UJO At\) 1'1" ~ )> II !(' ~ F .. -0 Ii ~ i '" ~ I! I 0 I! ~ -.. -< i U Ii r I ~~ -I C .1'1 Z \ r - ~ 1'1 -I .< iJ>J> ;. g,~ o Z ~Ul :-l ^ '" ~ "- oJ> II II ~I O~ I -IC .1'1 Z ~f;;::j I' ~ J> ~. 61t\l o Z Ul ^ 1'1" -IJ> ~I ",P''''I ! ~; ..if "II. '!~H !lP~l i;. ..-" II ~i. - ,I" .. -[Il U hi ~ l j I I c: If ::z:: l~ --l ::I>- I'--.) -0 .- )> :z .... <:> "I <:> '-'" ~ I!' I \ Ii I , \' -Lr. .1 II I I! i U li c: :z: ---l co MI "u B -j fIlC ~I \ r Z ~U fIl- ~ < -l 'J> -iC ! ::!)> fIlZ " 0 N r _ OZ,\ ~-l : 0 ~ )> ~N (5N fIl,\ Z,\ -ilD 0 21 :~ N \ fT1 '\ D , \ -i lD gl I c: 011 :z: .., /I. ---l ( B )> i'-) -, il i -c r- :.- z 'S I ~ 0'> -< B I! l"P~f I !(' tl!u [If ..~ i .. ~~.. I fir! lL llll Iii-if. c :z:: --I :J> ;u fTI )> ;u . fTI \ r . fTI :< I )>-- - -l 100 q Z ~Ul ~A !"-l () I . "I II I E3 Q'P~I ~ l[ t1!u Ip.ol s ... I II r; _8 ~ll ..I -lU ti iil ~ EliB E3 c :z:: --I :J> /"V .j ;1 I -u ~ 9 I o '-" 00 -< ~ ~ o ,0 ~ 1J I . ~ ~ 'r } Z !..... ~ rl=i' /!I i!i~:1 ;:;,1 I Ia: -----. I I I I I I I I __J l~ ~ i 8 ~ 1~ ~~ AI fTI )> AI ,fTI r 'fTI ;, < -4 '0 IZ Ul ~^ ~fTI -l () I 8 . -. il I ""tl ~ - S I o ~ I I I I \ L-l -~ I \ . _J --r I I I I I I L.__ _._._._._._.~ I I --------------' ~ o \ 0 ~ ~ I . ~ ~ :r p Z "il! lrJ .t'll tl! 1 f J & rrl I hl lilt! B "E3 II ~" ~ II II I II I II ____________________J II II II II II II ~ II II II ] II ~ E3" 0 ;0 II II f1l II \ 0 l> II ;0 II II ~ ~ fTl II r I fTl " < ~ ~ )> ::! 'r 0 E3 z } (j) ^ Z -fTl -i 0 I ~ ~IFr I .![ . B !1~H 1"1'1 Ii "0' I I ~lfl -c a. ~h r- '-Uit- :>> :z: .... g I 0 ~ [d~ . TERRA ENGINEERING, INC. r.~,'~.':~"-;:' 12:: \7~i~T :~>." , '. '.~ ,~" , . '- '..- ... -, ,I 'I . ,. .../ _.. i [ , ) Ii;' I :' . ,.. , I 'I II Iii I t\\ I FEB 2 0 2001 lil II . I \ \ > ,~ I.' ( CIVIL ENGINEERING . LAND PLANNING . CONSULTING r~ I 6001 GleRwood Ave. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422 Phone: 763-593-9325 Fax: 763-512-0717 February 16,2000 Jane Kansier City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. Prior Lake, MN 55372 Re: Revised PreIimimiry Plat Exhibits 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 exhibits (Sheets 1-4; 6 full size; 6-11xI7) for your review. The plans were revised per the Staff Report and the comments from the Planning Commission. The following changes were made: * Four units were removed on the north edge of the site to save a large contiguous wooded area in the northwest comer of the project. * The four unit building in the northeast comer of the site was changed to a three unit building (Lots 15-17, Block 2, 2nd Addition). * The temporary cu1-de-sac was moved north to be centered on the proposed street. * The four unit building (Lots 1-4, Block 3, 2nd Addition) south of the temporary cu1-de-sac was moved northward to save a large area of existing trees. * The two unit building on Lot 7-8, Block 1, 2nd Addition, was moved to the northwest to save trees and eliminated the encroachment into the 20% slope area. * The three unit building on Lots 4-6, Block 1, 2nd Addition, was moved northeast to save trees and reduce the encroachment into the 20% slope area. Only 530 sq. ft. is being graded within the 20% slope area. * The revised plan saves approximately 112 additional trees. The calculated tree replacement number is now 212 caliper inches. * The plan was revised to include a access road to the NURP pond. * The 100-year HWL, and the 30 ft. setback, is shown on the Grading Plan. * The emergency overflow from Wetland #1 will be controlled by Pond Structure #2 (CB2). A secondary outlet pipe will be sized during final design. * Attached is a drainage map showing existing conditions as requested. * We have contacted the Prior Lake Watershed District, and the final stormwater plan will be designed to the District standards. The developer/builder will be submitting a revised landscaping plan and tree replacement plan to meet the ordinance requirements. He will also submitted additional building elevations and floor plans as required. We understand that this project is rescheduled for the 2/26/01 Planning Commission meeting and the 3/5101 City Council meeting. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please call. Sincerely, PA 1j{. Peter 1. 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.) --... ..'-'-.- * .,*.,. - -.,.. '---,-.---.---..,--.. -., .*.-..-......-- --. -*-'. r~0 rs ~ IE-~ r; -;- =;~~~ ;:--;-1 I I ,\. ..- ""-' --,' " " , "._ '" '., i 1 t i ,,-- '-/ .. -.. '- ...,-~, : ': ; : I ! : ,I , "'/ I : /., FEB2S '/1 r:\) 2001 :;:' i f'\ I,; LJ \...i! :; .' Ii . ~ /! ~_. j j I --' SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST JORDAN, MN 55352-9339 (952) 496-8346 BRADLEY J. LARSON PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR! COUNTY HIGHWAY ENGINEER Fax: (952) 496-8365 February 26,2001 Jane Kansier City Planner City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 Subject: Regal Crest Access Issues CSAH 21 - East Side, North of CSAH 82 Dear Jane: I am writing do address concerns raised by local residents in regard to traffic safety with the Regal Crest development proposal adjacent to CSAH 21. Hopefully this will help the City, city residents, and developer understand the County's position on access to this development at this time. The main concern voiced to us in regard to this proposal is the location of access to CSAH21 (across from Windsong Circle), because of the limited sight distance to the north. We conducted a study that indicated there is 590' of sight distance from the location of the proposed access on CSAH 21 to the north. The minimum required for a passenger vehicle to cross CSAH 21 at this location (from the east to the west) would be 525', at the current speed limit of 45 mph. Although we agree that sight distance at this location is not ideal, it does exceed our minimum standard for sight distance used in determining whether or not a proposed access could create a safety hazard. Question also has been raised as to whether or not this access would be consistent with our minimum access spacing guidelines. As we have discussed with the developer's engineer and the City, the proposed access would likely be a right-inlright-out access in the future, based on full-movement accesses located \I.i mile apart at Lord's Street and CSAH 82. Therefore, to properly reference the guidelines, CSAH 21 is anticipated be a 4-lane divided highway, and the proposed access would be a "Low Volume, Non-Continuous Street". The resulting access spacing is 1/8 mile with no median opening. This proposed access is more than 1/8 mile from both CSAH 82 and Lord's Street. Another issue raised is the speed of southbound CSAH 21 traffic in the area of the proposed access. This segment of CSAH 21 has been designed and posted for 45 mph. We cannot responsibly analyze access proposals based on conditions created by speeding traffic. Ifthere are concerns about high numbers of motorists exceeding the speed limit, local law enforcement should be informed so they can determine how to address the issue, if necessary. Again, we realize that the location of this access may not be ideal. But we are required to provide "reasonable" access to adjacent property. As we lJI1derstand the current proposal, the property to be developed does not hav~ frontage on any other existing public street. Based on this fact, and on the fact that the minimum sight distance necessary does exist at the proposed street location, it is the An Equal Opportunity/Safety Aware Employer Jane Kansier Page 2 determination of the Highway Department that the proposed access to CSAH 21 is reasonable. That being said, we would fully support any additional effort made by the developer andlor the City to explore alternative locations for access to this development. We understand that this may not be easy, and would likely require coordination with adjacent property owners, but may be worth exploring. Please call me should you feel the County could be of further assistance with this. It was not my intention to wait until the last second to address these traffic safety issues, and we will continue to work to address these issues earlier in the development process with future development proposals. As discussed with the developer's engineer, and as noted in our original comments for Regal Crest, we will be requiring the installation of a right turn lane for southbound CSAH 21 traffic if the development is approved as proposed. Please call me with any questions, if the City needs additional information, or if you require further clarification on this issue. SinCere]Y~fV'-r~ ~orenson,p.E. Transportation Engineer Email: Brad Larson, County Public W orIes Director Craig Jenson, Transportation Planner C: Bud Osmundson, City Public W orIes Director Peter Knable, Terra Engineering Deno Howard, Prior Lake City Resident (~of.,,) w:\word\review\plats\O lylats\prelim\PL _RegalCrest2.doc . PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: 4B PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE GRADING AND EXCAVATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 115, RANGE 22 (CASE FILE #01-010) JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR X YES NO-N/A MARCH 26, 2001 PRESENTER: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: INTRODUCTION: The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (SMSC) is proposing to grade and excavate approximately 10,000 cubic yards on the property located on the west side 0 CSAH 83, approximately % mile south of CSAH 42 and 1f4 mile north of CSAH 82. The purpose of this excavation is to create an access drive to the Mystic Lake Casino. Section 1101.509 Grading, Filling, Land Reclamation, Excavation requires a Conditional Use Permit for excavation of more than 400 cubic yards. SITE ANALYSIS: Total Site Area: The total site consists of approximately 80 acres. Topography: This site has a varied topography, with elevations ranging from 974' MSL at its highest point to 944' MSL at the lowest point. The majority of the site drains to the wetland on the west side of the property. A portion of the site also drains to the wetland on the east side of the property. Vegetation: This site is a combination of woodland and pastureland. There are several significant trees, some of which will be removed by the excavation. The project is subject to the Tree Preservation requirements ofthe Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has submitted an inventory of the significant trees on the site, which identifies 1,880 caliper inches of significant trees. The Tree Preservation Ordinance allows removal of 25% of the total caliper inches for grading and utilities without tree replacement. Removal of additional caliper inches requires replacement at a rate of 1/2 caliper inch for each caliper inch removed. The plan submitted indicates a total of 1,114 caliper inches of significant trees, or 59.2%, will be removed. This requires replacement of 322 caliper inches of ] :\0 1 files\O 1 cup\dakotah pkw\pc report.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 . trees. The applicant has submitted a landscaping plan identifying the location and number of replacement trees on the site. Wetlands: There are two wetlands located within this site, with a total area of 37.8 acres. The plans indicate 1.33 acres of the wetland located on the west side of the property will be filled as a result of this project. The plans also indicate 0.06 acres of the wetland on the east side of the site will be filled. The applicant has submitted a wetland mitigation plan for this project. This plan is undergoing review by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP). The plan must be approved prior to approval of any permits. Access: Access to the site is from CSAH 83 on the east side of the site. 2020 Comprehensive Plan Desi2nation: This property is designated for Hospitality General Business uses on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Zoning: The site is zoned A (Agricultural). Shoreland District: The east half of the site is also located within the Shoreland District for Mystic Lake. There is no development, other than road construction, within the Shoreland District. REVIEW PROCESS: The proposed Conditional Use Permit should be reviewed in accordance with the criteria found in Section 11 08 of the City Code and Section 1101.509. Section 11 01.509 is the provision on Grading, Filling, Land Reclamation, and Excavation. The criteria are discussed on the following pages. City Code 1101.509 (2) Excavation. Excavation of material exceeding 400 cubic yards of sand, gravel, or other material from the land shall be permitted only by CUP. The permit application shall include, but is not limited to, a site plan which shows the finished grade of the land after the excavation has been completed, the effect of the proposed excavation upon the community and the adjacent land, the type of material to be extracted from the land, the type of equipment to be used, the period of time the excavation operation will be conducted, plans for implementation of measures to guarantee safety of the site and the excavation operation, plans for rodent and other animal control, fire control, general maintenance of the site and adjacent area, providing for control of material hauled to or from the site, and controls to be employed to limit the effect of wind or other elements on the site and the material extracted from the site. The permit application shall include a plan which shows the routes of trucks moving to and from the site to remove material from the site, an inventory of significant trees on the 1:\01 files\Olcup\dakotah pkw\pc report.doc 2 ~ site, and other pertinent information necessary to the decision whether to approve the CUP. No permit shall be granted for a period longer than 12 months. The CUP shall impose conditions upon the owner of the land to be excavated and the person performing the excavation operation which will prevent damage to the community and adjacent landowners during the course of the excavation operation. Those conditions may impose restrictions in all areas affecting the excavation operation and the City may require a Letter of Credit to insure the conditions imposed and the completion of the work will be performed in the manner described in the plan and CUP. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) ANALYSIS: Section 1108.200 of the City Code sets forth the criteria for approval ofa CUP. (1) The use is consistent with and supportive of the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. One of the goals of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan is to plan for access to and movement of people, goods and services. Approval of this CUP will allow the creation of an additional access to the Mystic Lake Casino. This access will help to relieve congestion on existing roads. Objective 5, under the goal of Security, is to provide for conservation and protection of the natural environment. The policies include providing adequate regulation to prevent the development of endeavors which will create a hazard to the environment and to require developers to retain the natural environment as much as possible. The conditions set forth in this CUP address environmental hazards and require tree replacement and wetland mitigation. (2) The use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community as a whole. Based on staff review, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The conditions of the approving resolution are intended to ensure ongoing protection of the community. (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. Section 1101.509 of the Zoning Ordinance allows Grading, Filling and Land Reclamation as a Conditional Use within any zoning district. The conditions set forth in the Zoning Ordinance will be met with the issuance of the Conditional Use permit. 1:\01 files\OI cup\dakotah pkw\pc report. doc 3 . . (4) The use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, services, or improvements which are either existing or proposed. The use will not have adverse impacts on governmental facilities, services or improvements since approval will actually help to alleviate traffic on the existing roads. During excavation, the applicant will be responsible for maintaining the condition of the adjacent roads. (5) The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of properties in close proximity to the conditional use. The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of properties in close proximity. The excavation will take place on an 80 acre parcel of land, and includes only a small portion of the site. (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 landscape plan identifying the required replacement trees has been submitted. The applicant will be required to submit a Letter of Credit in order to ensure compliance with this requirement. (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 plaQs shall be included as part of the conditions set forth in the CUP approved by the City Council. The plans have been prepared by a civil engineer. (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 CUP 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 CUP approved by the City Council. 1:\01 files\O 1 cup\dakotah pkw\pc report. doc 4 Additional conditions to ensure the protection of the general health, safety and welfare of the public are included as part of the CUP. These conditions include hours of operation, responsibility for road clean up and the need for permits from other governmental agencies. CONCLUSION Staff recommends approval ofthe conditional use permit request, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to beginning any work on the site, the applicant must obtain approval of the wetland mitigation plan. 2. Prior to beginning any work on the site, the applicant must obtain a permit from the Watershed District and from any other agency as required. Copies of the approved permit must be submitted to the City. 3. An Irrevocable Letter of Credit, on a form prepared by the City and approved by the City Attorney, is to be submitted prior to the recording of the resolution. The amount of the LOC is for 125% of the cost of the landscaping. Bids or estimates for the required landscaping must be submitted to the City for review and approval. 4. The excavation must be done according to the approved plans. 5. The clean up of gravel as a result of spills or general transportation of gravel on any public road shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 6. Hours of operation are 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Monday through Friday (weekdays) and 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon on Saturdays. 7. Watering for dust control shall be done on an as needed basis or within 24 hours written notice from the City. Such notice shall be transmitted by facsimile to the applicant. Dust control includes the entire project area and is not limited to roadways. Water for dust control shall be provided from an off-site source. 8. The CUP is valid for one year, but is revocable at any time for noncompliance with any condition contained herein. At the expiration of its one (1) year term, the property owner may make application to the City to renew the CUP. The initial approval of this CUP does not create any right, in law or equity, to the renewal thereof. Any renewal of the CUP is subject to City Council approval and is to include any information as requested by City staff or the City Council that would aid the City Council in determining whether the excavation activities conducted pursuant to this CUP created any adverse impacts to the health, safety or welfare of the City or its residents. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend approval of the CUP and the Preliminary Plat subject to the above conditions. I: \01 files\O 1 cup\dakotah pkw\pc report.doc 5 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. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends Alternative #1. ACTION REQUIRED: Motion and second to recommend the City Council approve the CUP subject to the listed conditions. 1 :\0 1 files\O 1 cup\dakotah pkw\pc report.doc 6 Location Map (1:, ~\~ ti L i . ..\\,\ 'TT .. 1.~"Q r: _. f--- II, H \\~ i \J f-- I i 1 _h _., .. -, -, -, f--- L ~ j t--- i h ; . .l:::.... ~~~- I _ . __ _. --4 M .-:.LLI' , , - /~ '\T1T)~~ - ) - 0XY iJ! -: ~V <;I}", q,.. ", -, '------.. , K: - ~~'. Rt9~...~ : ' ~'Jf!r'- Location -c. ( c::'G. .' - ~ -~' . , c: ;~-~-: -}; . - y '~. _ ' " I : - :-1 ( - 1M I nT m~ <\:illrm, i I ~ I ,. 1lJlW'WI, - -- 0~ ~ ~N' ~ '.., ~.~ ~,~. iW~ ,/ . ~,., ....::', - .. . -I '.1.;;, , - .... ~..', f--- ,'.' D~ .~8i~ ~ f--- n':U, , " .:. ;, h(' 'lr.' ,r:tr-, U ---..., , ,1=" . _.~ ~lJ --- tJ " " v Ii _ ~_ i/ l-( ~R ~ ~ , \1/ . ~ i ~ - ... "" "" ~ --:::- ~ ~ It -~ C/ """ 'iD -- ....." ~ 0 - :;!"".', , i'j r: ~ .' -. .' ";" ,':;":"'::,, /.. ',' ,.:y. - /1" t)J ~' -"rs,'f{7 ~\ ~""""9' - .' lIt::: :,' 'A ;~IY * W r/:,,' ....".,""'" . -- N A 700 0 700 1400 Feet ~_ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~uo ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~Q~~~~ I ~ ~~-,~ ~~ 0 ~~ ~Vj~ ~a ~c::> ~ ~~~~~~g5? ~~~~~~~<:~ 1S~~~~~~~eJ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~~ ::s~ ~~~ 0 ~ ~ ..~..~~ ~ b,."~~~~ o ~N 9g u~~~@~ OQ~ ~ ~~Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ UlVl ffia i!'F o~ )-VI e~Vl Vluffi ~~i!'>:' ~~o:i g:~~o ...J ~ -~ tn ~~~~ ~ a: "Q.a.ffi D::3:~ z::t:C)~ Dc((I) z;::~~ ~~~ w ~~5?o: wlt'5 g ~ ~ ~g ~ ~ ~ 11'\1 .! I 'I !!!l!I!!!!!H!:! Iln Ill!! o Q lllllll1lil"'I~III".llli ~ liliiiilil 11 i! i Eli .h ~~g In ~ ~!i' ~ ~i~i no :"~ ,'" .:~x eh --.e ~ :-":) ~i i 0- W w E ~ x w o ~ cs = '''' f- t::J d ... :c Z 0 (/) 8 -q~~~ x: ---0 VI N lD '"" ~ ~~ ~;~ ...",... 000 ,..;..tlri I I I 000 l""i':ui "::J ".' ~ ~ ! ~ ~; 3 i" 5 ~ . ~ ~ II ~g ~~ ~ ~:.~ ~ hi:; s! ~u ~ ~ :d~~ ; '1 $ 3' e'e ~ 8 t ~s ~ i~ ~ ~. i ~I ~~ ~.~ ~ ~ I n 3 ~a B ~i"! ft. ~! ~~. r ~ ~. i~~ ~ .!~ ~ .' . ~.'; <: .~ a~ ~ ~ ~. .~ ! Il~ ~ ~ ~ h i~ ~l~ ~ ~~ t h:"_ ~ ~ i~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ h~ Ii ;.~ ~i i ~ i~ ;~~ !~ f~~ ;~ !~~!I Iii I~ I ~ !; m ~i I~~i ~i ~~I i: ~3i~~! ~ i ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~O!i ~ Bil ~. ;! ii. i . or iii~ ii~ ~'. > :;~u ~ ~ ~. ! ~ I 3 ~~~ ~~ ~~$ ~i ~~ ui ~'u U~it ~~ .~. f" ~~ .s f ~ ~ . "~_ . :11 !I :11 :!! ~i~ !! ~ : !; ;id ~I i i. t ~ :~ ~~iig~: ~. WSU~~~ P ;ili~i!~ ill ~iM~~' ~!i ~~~~:!~ h~ htBfli hi ~.~~~ -< --> .h~. . ,~. ~.'..~! -"I .~.~~. !j~ ahg il~ liri. 8S ..'f:t!ll is.._ e ~~~~~iE j&!i ~.B~~ f ll'; ~i~ ~h ~iH ~~ I!~~ "i' ;j~ ~~ o. ~~.. ~~~I~ ~~ iA , on o ,!. o I 8 d z t I ~ I! g: - i H \ ~ ij El G ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ E !; ;I~ 91!~! ~ ::: e t:I ~ z ----=> W .....:i <r: ~ :~ ~ o ~ z w ::2 Ct. o .-l W > W o ~ U o 0::: ::2 <( I (/) ~ 9 9 I U <( (/) b Z~ ~I')<( 0:::<(106)- 20.ow (/)lL.~a::o _0 WW zzc::i~~ QQUoO ~ti::2lL.:i= u:::::>Owo :Jg:8:i!:z Ct.(/) >- Ct.Z>-I~ <(0<(00::: 'U:i=:::::>W Ct. ~0Ct. ::iWO::: 0::: 0 .I <(I 0::: U~Ct.~Ct. =- ~ I- 0:: w ll. o 0:: ll. Uz (/)<( ~5 (/)0 0:: UJ ::< 0:: o ~ w Z o ~ u ~ -~ U!:::> (/)0::: ::21 F- I (/)1 ~ i . ~ 9 " DAKOTAH PARKWAY m-17ll' " ; 15 15 : :bJJ~ ~~ I 3 9 g -, ~ ~"\\,, ",,~ "" " '.:' ,'\ " :\'- ~\,,,:' -, " , . f- I (/) (/) :::::> U:::> ~ (/)0::: U ~f- ::2 (/)Z "> u c:i V> m f- (/) U:::> (/)0::: ~f- (/)Z ~ ~~ >< ~~~ Ao ~ ;:;E U f-< ~~ ~ ~o Cl o~ ~UJ UJ w IO I-UJ ...J I- U"- ~Q UJ 0:: CD O(f) "-<( ZI Oz F=O gF= 0::<( I-U (f)::i Zll. 00.. U<( o o o N (f) W I-- . <( '" u ~~ o(J)",:::; (f)0:::",~ U1 W If)O <( W z Z<( 1---1-- 000 o:::z(f) <(ww IOZ -'zz t5F=~ Z5 . w(J)<( . Z l( 0::0~ ::;;:uI <( U'o - 0 -' .. ~ II w -' '" u VJ (r"-'-~--........) '- . l ( l I il> 1...1... ) .~.~~~~'. :'-)~ ii! L~ ~~~;!j Ii II !t>(') /""' <i-- ~(\..(-,'"'_' 5 fI; ,.If. (J"- ) ~ g ~II , -, / ~::Ii i \ il> - ii!~ '-... I / . "" ; ~ ~ -...J !t> !ill " >-~ ;~ i! ~~ !3 >- ::0: .... ~~ CJ ~ ~!:l 0: "- c~ lI> ~ '-, ---....... :::::::',...",. ... ....... '''-..........~,' .........'...,'" '-"" :..........., \ ......., \ \ I I \ I I I " ( " \ I I I I I 1 , : I '"' ---------- ............ '-, ...'........, I" I I ....~......... ~",,,..,, " ............ ------..,-_ ______Jh: _/,/ (') !l, Jh. Jh. !t> (') Jt, lI> Jh. Jh. il> Jh. Jh. ll> jt, , , , \'" , I , ~~\ - \''''''' "i,~) I I , I , " , , , , , , , OJ o oJ 0: i o II ~8 ~~ ~~ ~ i ~ ~ ~lf' '" ~~!~l ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~I~~i ~O~~;::;- ... .... ... :e. ~ ~ ......."'~l= -'! ~\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , , , \ \ , , , '.~'\'.(\ I; u, , \ \ \ ru~ / ' \ 'I" I~' '! \ I ',\.\ '\ I ," t \ '~. , , , ''':' \ l~~<<\) 'rp. i _, \ \'i!e, '. \ I I I I . ... \ \~ EM \\ '-.' I : JI " " '\... ~ \ \ I I I " ::, .J \ \ \ I I I ....... ,\. \ \\ \ ,,_1 : : ..-,\\\ \\:: --,~\ \ \~ I I I \ ~ I I r j ~ ; ~ \ ;, : I (\ \ ~ ; i \ \1 I d ,111.1 j i .ri: \ \:: \/ i, I f ,:\1,1 1'1 f 1\;\1 \: i! . /. ~ I ; : : 1 \ I: . I ;',11" 1\' I n'f1i'll I'll, I 11.11 ,\ I I \ 1\ 'IT\~.\ "'~'-}) II Ill" -- 1/ ,\ \ l't '\'.... t' :,:,' I ; Ii', \ \ \\', '. Ji\;{~~~:~:~);~ / I \ -,<I ...1 I /~: \___-,-,' '//\ i:= _.../:--.___ /. ill: /-~...~ ~~/---..:-':..~_--, \ 'II! "~lfl \ . ~o \ 1 ~.l'!: I \ ~:~ : \. 1.\,: I \ '..-----..... ",I // / H -~ s _ "" ............ " ,"'i<o::~.- "" :....,__' I -', '-- ~ ...... ............. .' , ---...::: - ,._~~'-:'~~, '1 ~s ~ . i; ->l \ , \ \ \ \ \ , \ \ \'" ''i .............. -... ...... , , ....,. \ \ \ ->l c.i vi -.J1z~ J' ell , '\ ->.I ,r ~I ( ) ( ) ( ) ( .--../ '-,....--1- o ~ o ." f""~ ~~ :" ~e i!~ i; h \~ ' !J ~ ;; ~I. ',~..! ~ ..~ i. \, o , ~ " ... "r I '/!;,d'l~~?}~~~~~'~~~~~~~ ':..=-=--~_)"\-1 -~ I" I ,,,_________ " '1""~, i-'--ll ,i-J -:;rs-r' , ,',-,'_'.:,-- --,-- . ,w, '. --lSr- -->=~ll. "~a~ I: ( D' -----;;.~~>*:'< ~~ ~l ~J/ ,,/ ~i I: I : 01......,.. '-"~I '\.~ .i 1:rr:'"''' ,,/ ! I I I ~~ /'j'd /".... ~3 J / ;: D /../ ,,' 8 ../ 1- I ~~ Ii' / /'.: I : ;1,,;/", / ,J: ;. , " - ---,-- "", I : / ,/ /< ,/' ",,/ ........------ ,\ I / /' /1,/// I"" ........~,.---_...:-.......-...." : -:g .-r/'? ," / / ;" ,,/" "....----.........., ----..J \ rfF/ I / I I / ". ...----.., -..... 1\" t/~-- ..,' / ,t' ,/ /'," 1/ /-_ """', -'J" \ ( I I , I I I r -.... \ \ I \ / " " " " " /; .... ......,1\', \. / ,,",' I ' I I I " I,.. _______ ...-s:! ......~~....,./ //".r I I ,/ /' ,/ / I, \, 'J! \,' ..... ....._..... __ ...._________... ( "'\ ~............"" ,/ I I I I I ,I \ 1\ '--________ .....;....- _.... I I I , I , / ' ________ ____ t..-;;.,,;4- ......-... I / / / / /' ,/ I ------------------.---- \ ,/ __...-..... __...."'....'" 1/ /1 ,,I ,,I I i, ',I " ______ ____ rf,- ....- I" " I I / / il ~..... I It' ,-/~~-----.--.'.,/' / / ,/ / i' '! ""_,__,_~:-:_____~_,_'.'_-~~ I I -, --- , r'JI _-_n_'u.'_'n' I". I~~~_'-,::-:~~~_....~ I ,.-t..-....-..../ " ,__._____-_-_::::.---:.~--_-_-_.:..~ ~, \ ; '1f~~:::~~:::::::-_/--- (, "i::----r---"'1;-- ,\-_, // /~. .---,-no--::::: \ ,I,.... .........""'-'....w-........:::.~~~~_ ..... ,. I I'" /" ", ,____'_____, "'\,__ ',__ -".' 1', . i ) (,n__.:__,,,,,,: _..---" "': '.-'L/" ,/1,<,0' ~t~~_...-l .... i 1 " I'; _ ..--...\ '\ / /.. ,/ '\'\~-----""::"__I-",J / I ..--- ............ 'I" ./ /' tl ~\\:-::--;:~---~-,:-::.::,<"..-,..... .----. ...\" '* .;l o ~ ~ -'iI .,iJ o ~ e ;; ~ ---- - --.--. - -- --;> ~- ~. e ~ ~ ->.I '" "!I , , , , c::: \. . .1) ...~/ ->.I ->.I ~~ ~~ ~~ '* ~~ ,- >.1 il "l ->l ->.I .' .' /' ~ " o z ~H ~ 1(5 ~j~ '" 2~; ~ .... ~ '" Q. ,I , ~ >..t2 ~~ o;~ ~~ e~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ .... "' ~ \ , , , , , , >.. .... ~~ u 3 ~~ '" Q. c~ ~ '" II l ~s ~~ ~~ '" ~ ; U ~ G '" ~ "'~ ~ ~ iS~ ~! /: ; I , ~ ~ II 1'1 'II iii, ~ .:Ii ti Hll "' Ml j .' ~ ~ F1 ~ ~~.. ~ ~~ ~~~ ffi "'~s~~ I ~~ ~I~ ~I~~~ ~o~ El' ~ "'-l ~ ~ ; , ..._.....~= -'J] "',} (' *' ..............., -'J] -ll '-J', "\ -'J] -ll -'J] '-l. , J -ll -' -'J] -'J] -'J] '. ( '- ~:-J~:~OO::~~C~C::::~_~~~~;;;__,__-_~~;;~;:<::::\;-_--__._ "''''~~''''''''~T-'''C-C~ ' ..;----'-r-,-'.-,..,-~',' ~:. . . .' ~:c_-_.' . . "'''t:~\:j: j-- .. . >~ -'J] j \. " ., ~ jV'J-..J l ~ \ ..;j -;l'r' , " t . -"--'-,-,~, .J -'l (' -....... \ '-, -l (' f ->I ->I ii 21. ':'~'-'--' -ll.;l "-.r,;' .Jl . ->I -. .;J ,r-" -'l ~""......~,,'.J-""'~:;7..~'-=~:~\..;J -'J] .A ~:~~~~~~, " , ~ 1-' -------. -- 'i ' \,",,-,Jv~...,... <'::::::::::::::::::~:--]::'::':::'::'::':n~n<>=>'><i'\ ""_. \ '/ i: ::::~::---'-- --~-- fR ti-----.------n-.>,>:" I, '" ,~\{, ,': ::::~:.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~!~ .~:===~~~~========<>::~:~~:l><-."", \,) j -. '--- ~ -..-- -__n_, " , , , " . \: I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~::::~:===----.~;, \, \, \,\\>.\'" ,,- , \( -::::::--...---..=:-=-=:-::::-- .-: : I,' " ", " " " " \ "j", \ . "- '-'---" \ \ :,.',/ / ", " " \ \ " ", I ',~_, \ .... ....... ,\ \ / I ,'" " \ \ , \ \ k \ -,\, .. ........:: ....~: '--, ", \ J I 1.,'/ . " \ '. ~ \ \ /, \ \ ' --, . I I " , " / ,-/ -----...,.' . i) " " '. ~--, \, \ i ,/ / i ii",' / / " ", ' , , , , II'" \ I' I' I I ,',/,i ,',' J I ;/ J " I 1'(' " I' / / I I I ;' I I I I I (' 'J ' ' ,I" / " " '.' / " , ~ \ ';,,__...... "'. " / I' ,,'" / ;/,/ " /' )!la:' ........-..\ ,/ " ,/", \.~''''''~~~~ ...........::..:.._ ../ " / " " / /! ',r--;:.':1-', I' V ,....-'__, ~--'~.. _ I, , / I I , / rfi~-""'" ' ",'" //'...".. ....." ~ ,----' /' /// / / //1 ,: Jt-~)->""~/?:,/'-",, ',--..----- - ::::;:{:;/~):>>//! r. · _/ /___>_:::::::~~::::-:: -,- ", , ~ {rf ?Y' ________--" </' , " \ It; ~ ij _--------_::. ....... -...... -~ -~;:::~ --- ------------ / ----, ="------- _/'-_. ,-----' ------...---- I " ...... .----.--- ------------:;. ,/ /-_/ -~>~/' ---. ---..- '\ '/' ----- -- /--- ----- , " / - ::::::.:: ---- " : : / / ,- / / ,----,/ - -, IS "; \ :' / :' :' / //<//---,:::::)~-~~-~-~_:-_-~~~~~" ,----- : : : : -/,/ /////,,/ ".- .'-..' - ! ! i i ; ///////";-'_ ' ,,' _--" '111'1 I" .- I II I I II If / I" I" ,,".- ,'" :-:://///////~~ / ~ I ! I : ( / " r " /... ", / :: I: i: ,; ("', " : : ~ \ " \ "...", '\ { I I , I \ \ ... '... \ ' \ \ '., \ " \ '... \ \ \ ~ , , , , \ "', , 'I \ , \ '... \"', 1 \ \ I " , , ',', i \ \ " , . I ' \\\ i; / ::: I' ,. . " ,', I I I ': , I t 1 I I I " " .I.... ",' I / I ,', I . I " " J / I : : I : i , ; i / / / __:_ .,' / /> / //,',' " .' I I I I , / I I' I ' : f " I I " ............. " , I " ,.I / I I:" I ',', I I : .' I I I' I ' i I I " I r ...... / ,.I /1_,," ,," ,," /",,'/', " : I I ; ~ \ \ \ I, \ " \ ! : l_____......., /' ,,' /' ,.I," ,1,,","/' "1 .' .- '.' " \ ',', """\,,,,,, " '--'-',','//,'/,'//< 'f: . i'111" .," ' \ , ' " , , " , , " -----_o~ I I " / , I I" ," " I ,." 11. " " " "",',,, "\\,,\,,\,, ""- ////,'/////// "., V. \"~""o'" ','...', \ \. , '. \ \ '. '.-.----_ - " , _ , . , . , , --. , .... --:~,;f~~~ I \ " '.~,n~t , , i\. ,., : \"-:. ''{i:'\\l' ',ft <t,00~~ l/ r;?' ., " '.1\ ~, . 0) ~ f,' /,' "J,I 1.'( : ."1', '-. \0 I,l' (1 'e; " I/!T:. l~$\ '\ : )I~p'~ .\D/,' (;}, ~~'~\,.. / ,i" f-r:--, -- -<~ I /~, .:'.' /Eft -- " .'......:'<i JZl , I / , \ ~ I G' " /.. ' ! II I r ~~ ','.u:: I I " ~\ I ~ ~ "r ~ , JL 1::>'1""1 'I~, I / f..., \ ~ ~ 1 1\ ,/ \ \I'\_~ I 'III~' / f"~1 I ~ ~ " : : ~ I ~r" ,.." l ~ \ I t!\ I !"1~f:1 /' / , / 1, ...-r.1111II / I " I 1 0: 1 : ; : ~}~.." , // / \ '+~"I:rr;:I ,.' / '/'r- t 1 I II 'I . 'II { 1 ~ : : I : I / /,,~, /;' , . 'j:; I U j", /'Plt";' 1 , / I '/ ',' "h I \j:>...: /.!: .'1' f ///tI "0-, I', 1- ~i! ; I' l,i i,/ / (. , 'f- ;11: lil/~!/""" , \, ,., r J I .,' r ,./-- " , j I I,';, 'I I, I I I ~ I I 4' j:): ': j \ 'q> . I " I, I, I I. i (,; : \ i' ' ~ I I :1 \ : \: : 1 ..",,--'1- ,"'re, 'I i' \.!Ct ( I lb '!I '\~ '~" ' \ \ \ ,. ~ ; t : ; , \ , I I ~ I t 1 11.1 I I I "'lit II " i~1 \: I I 1 'I , I ,'1 \\\,:i: i : t [ I I I I ~~ I 1 r i :; ~ . b.,I:::1'W '!:. \ t:, 1"'-,' r /' @\ ' I [, 1 J ...1 I 0 :r 1,111111 N ' ~,'Il;; I \ "', /1 . .~:'!!i!ii[\ ;~_,-],;~~\ fl! : I : ::: L / \ ~~t'il:lll ,-. /\\ I~i':): i ill . .\. / '\\ a,./ : II ., \ /, ! I'" ' . J" ..I ',-'," I " 1/,' iJi(t';I) J. ,."..1 \ ,.' I I \:i....:;:/ ~/. ~ ,/1./;"1-.1;/'/)' : ~ , ":1// J:f ~ \. 'fl{;/!).' /:~>:\ '" .//-/,/P~g\\\\ ;' hI I I /V'!~ \ \ \ 1 -. 'I " ! I 3. ~ \ \ : I; ; t tn!; ; I . I ~ 1 , : ~ I : . , '\ 'o'" ~ ; ; ; I , 'f'"( '...\\ 1la: "I t 1\',Elt'\',,,\: : : : -;I, t. \W", ) : : : '" ...I. \ i"'\ ,\ I : I ,,;J "'..)\\,"1: I .2 i~'-~\~ \ \ \ ! : fO.t J.])HS ns -'J] ,>' " , ~'\ ~ \~ \ , l'- X " d z I- U ~ ll: ~; l ~ ~ ~ ~. ~~ olf;l~I~~ ~ '" 8 ili ~J ~~ ~I ~~ ~ ~ a: 0.. ;... ~ I~ I~ 0: i o II ~8 ~~ ~~ III A i U ~ ~ a: ; ~l: as .... ~ i I~ ~ ~ I 1'1 ~ ill ~ P.II 1;! II ~ !.I: t ti 'WI Oil II., .. It'l . ,Ii. '. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~g:(' on ~~ ~~l i !dl~ ~I!~i ~~Ol:>~;:;j' ~ ~ C-1 ~ - ~.- "'''0_''''''_'''''' . AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: SITE: PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: INTRODUCTION: PLANNING REPORT 4C CONSIDER VARIANCES TO IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA AND STRUCTURE SETBACK TO THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHWM) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15507 CALMUT AVENUE FOR D. MARK CROUSE, (Case File #01-017PC) LOT 9, AND PART OF LOT 10, NORTH GRAINWOOD STEVEN HORSMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR _X_ YES NO MARCH 26, 2001 The Planning Department received a variance application from D. Mark Crouse (applicant/owner) to allow an existing deck to remain on the property located at 15507 Calmut Avenue. The deck was constructed in the year 2000, without the required permits, and is attached to an existing single family dwelling. The existing dwelling was constructed in 1995 after approval of variances to the front yard setback and to the setback from the ordinary high water mark. The following variances are requested for the deck: 1) A 2,115 square foot variance to permit an impervious surface coverage area of 4,422 square feet (57.5%) rather than the permitted maximum area of 2,307 square feet (30%) [Ordinance Section 1104.306: Impervious Surface Coverage]; 2) A 71 foot variance to allow a structure setback of 4 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) elevation of 904 feet, rather than the required setback of 75 feet as required by Ordinance Section 1104.302 (4) Setback Requirements (See Attachment B Variance Resolution 7805: A 63 foot setback variance to the OHWM). DISCUSSION: Lot 9, and part of Lot 10, North Grainwood, was platted in 1947. The subject lot is riparian and located within the R-1 (Low Density Residential) and the SO (Shoreland Overlay) Districts. The lot dimensions are approximately 62 ft. by 107.5 ft. for a total lot area of 7,689 square feet (Attachment 1 Certificate of Survey). The lot is considered a substandard nonconforming platted lot of record. The property owner does not own either of the adjacent properties. L:\01 files\01 variances\01-017\VarRpt.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 first variance request is for 2,115 square feet to allow an existing impervious surface coverage area of 4,422 square feet for 57.5 % of the total lot area. A break down of the area shows a structure coverage area of 2,152 sq. ft., and concrete driveway and patio area of 2,270 square feet (Attachment 2 Impervious Surface Calculations). This is an existing condition; however, the impervious surface area was created subsequent to approval for a buildinQ permit to construct the new house addition in 1995. One of the conditions for approval of the permit was to not exceed the allowable impervious surface coveraQe area [Attachment 3 Department Checklist- Building Permit 95-279 (3 pages)]. The second variance request is for 71 feet, to permit a structure setback of 4 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The applicant/owner submitted a building permit application for the deck as a result of notification from the City of an ordinance violation for constructing a deck without an approved permit. Upon review of the certificate of survey submitted with the application, the City determined two variances shall be required to further process the deck permit. Research for this report discovered a previous owner of the subject lot made two variance requests that were approved on April 6, 1978. A 63 foot variance to permit a 12 foot structure setback to the ordinary high water mark (904' elevation), and an 8 foot variance to permit a 17 foot front yard setback. The variances were approved to allow the construction of a year round dwelling to replace a seasonal cabin on the substandard lot [Attachment 4 Variance 78-05 (4 pages)]. On January 31, 1995, the builder, Trim Tech Inc., submitted a building permit application for the owner, D. Mark Crouse, for the house and garage addition. According to the survey submitted with the permit in 1995, the house was located 13 feet from the OHWM, and 22.6 feet from the front lot line. This building location is within the variance parameters approved in 1978, but by moving the house location to within 1 foot of the required minimum 12 foot setback from the OHWM, this only allows for a 1 foot deck extension from the principal structure (Attachment 5 Survey-Building Permit 95-27). The existing deck structure serves as access to the main level and the deck's dimensions are 10 feet deep by 26 feet long to a step down level 9 feet by 7 feet with 3 foot wide stairs that wrap around to the ground level. Under the deck is a concrete patio area for the lower level walkout basement. The City Engineering Department submitted comments for this report stating in essence, approval of the requested variances is contrary to the goals of the Comprehensive Lake Management Plan, which is to minimize the transport of nutrients, sediment and runoff from city streets and lands which impact the Prior Lake watershed, and promotes lake creep, the encroachment of buildings and impervious areas towards the lakeshore. The Department of Natural Resources has not submitted comments on this request as of 3/20/01. Any comments received prior to the public hearing will be distributed at the meeting. L:\01 files\01 variances\01-017\VarRpt.DOC Page 2 Staff has determined there was a legal alternative building envelope that would have permitted a 6.6 foot deck, had the house been placed to within 17 feet of the front lot line as provided in Variance 78-05, rather than a front setback of 22.6 feet as built. 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, and 2, the subject property is a nonconforming platted lot of record, but was developed under the current ownership and they did not meet the conditions spelled out in the building permit for the principal structure. Therefore, staff has determined the requests do not meet the hardship criteria as a legal alternative building site existed that allowed for development of the subject lot with the originally approved setback variances. 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. 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. However, when all required setbacks are applied, there was 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. The approved legal site precluded the need for the additional variance requests. The hardship has been created by the builder and owner when the decision was made on the building dimensions and location of the structure, as well as, the excessive paving of the subject lot. 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 will not impair light and air to adjacent properties or increase congestion, danger of fire or endanger public safety. 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. L:\01 files\01 variances\01-017\VarRpt.DOC Page 3 The granting of the variances will adversely affect the above stated values by increasing structure encroachments upon the lakeshore and thereby affecting the adjacent properties and the 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 variances is contrary to the intent of the Ordinance or the Comprehensive Plan by allowing increasing encroachment setbacks and excessive impervious surface conditions than was originally approved by the City. 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. The granting of the variance requests appears to serve as a convenience to the applicant. 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 hardship results from the actions of the property owner when he constructed the dwelling in 1995. 9. Increased development or construction costs or economic hardship alone shall not be grounds for granting a Variance. Financial considerations alone shall not be grounds for granting this variance request. The property owner helped to create the need for these variance requests by not following the approved conditions for the original building permit. RECOMMENDATION: The staff has concluded that all of the required variance hardship criteria have not been met, and that the hardship was created by the owner when the principal structure was constructed in violation of the building permit conditions, and by constructing the deck addition without an approved building permit. Staff therefore recommends denial of the two variance requests. ALTERNATIVES: 1. 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. 2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose. L:\01 files\01 variances\01-017\VarRpt. DOC Page 4 3. Deny the application because the Planning Commission finds a lack of demonstrated hardship under the zoning code criteria. ACTION REQUIRED: Staff recommends alternative #3. 1. Motion and second adopting Resolution 01-008PC, denying a 2,115 square foot variance to permit an impervious surface area of 4,422 square feet (57.5%), and deny a 71 foot variance to permit a structure setback of 4 feet, rather than the required 75 feet setback to the OHWM of 904 feet. L:\01 files\01 variances\01-017\VarRpt.DOC Page 5 RESOLUTION 01-008PC A RESOLUTION DENYING A 71 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 4 FOOT STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK, AND DENYING A 2,115 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE AREA OF 4,422 SQUARE FEET (57.5%) BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. D. Mark Crouse (applicant/owner) has applied for variances from the Zoning Ordinance in order to permit the construction of an attached deck to a single family residence on property located in the R-l (Low Density Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following location, to wit; 15507 Calmut Avenue NE, legally described as Lot 9, and that part of Lot 10, North Grainwood, Scott County, MN. 2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in Case #01-0 17PC and held hearings thereon on March 26, 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 exists that meets the required setback for the structure on the subject lot. The applicant was directed by previous variance and building permit conditions as to the amount of impervious surface area, such that the hardship created has been created by the applicant. Reasonable use of the property exists without the requested variances. 1:\01 files\O 1 variances\O 1-0 17\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's, as originally 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 00-017PC 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's for an attached deck to an existing single family dwelling and impervious surface area greater than 30% of the lot area, as shown in Attachment 1 Survey; 1. A 2,115 square foot variance to permit an impervious surface coverage area of 4,422 square feet (57.5%), rather than the allowed maximum area of 2,307 square feet (30%). 2. A 71 foot variance to permit a structure setback of 4 feet from the ordinary high water mark of904 feet, rather than the required 75 foot structure setback. Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on March 26,2001. Thomas E. V onhof, Commission Chair ATTEST: Donald R. Rye, Planning Director ]:\01 files\O J variances\OJ -OJ 7\dnyres.doc 2 \ \ \. '" \ ATTACHMENT 1 i ,0 of \-0 \'\ \-\tlE " .0R< ___-\ /" \ \ w ::> z w .> <t. ...-.-\ \>l , \ t- \ t" .~ 'i . "') r "I 6: -; \fI \ ~ ~ . ~~ ':' .1' '0", \ I I v'; "'~ <;( U , 1 9,e." ... . ,,:' C,\\\\N ;"." (.r. . i. . \ i \ ATTACHM.E'NT . 2 . ..:,'CITY"OF :PRr.()R:tAKE" . ':lmp~rvio us S ul-fa c e .C al c ul.a.tioIis ., "'},,' .;:'trcibe'Submlttedwith'Bul)ding Permit Application):.' . . 'P6r'All.Prbpertles'Loctlted)n the.:ShorelandiDistrict (SD).'" . :,. ,,:'.;:fhe<Ma-;.um\1n1.':trnp~rvfoiJ$:Sutfac~.Coverag~Permitted -in J'O Percent.. .... '. . i ~;. .' ~ ., .'. . .' '. " . . .' "" .' ",' .' . . . ";..' .....iJl<. :~\\\i\i-r-'."'<N\)~~~"" ".:~.cS' ... ".\ :....:' .... '". ... ',' ':"", ~,r ~~e;1~,:f.:ddrr'~~" : ' i' : "'\'S.E>o1.".' .. . :..:)':ot' Ai'~.~.." "','1.1', lJ.~q ',: ': Sq. Peet": .~' 30% = .............. ~~.o~., ': ********************~*~************************************************* ..' " " .'.WIDTH: x i. ..1.:.(0 "> . x. .' '.'....,,?"cp'.' .,:~ = . 'SQ..FEET \ \4:\:t \oc~'. "" ", : '. ~: ,.' I'," . ., = , '" ,. ," .j' '. x :. . / \"'." . .... tOTAL'PRlNCIPLE ,sTR U CTURE;.....;.......~.:;..... ' . l'" '" :......." '. .-. .... ." '. . . .' ::. ," .' " . .\: . ~ ..~ .... 'I.: ," ,., ::::'T6T4'DETACH.~?';~.UILDmGs'~":"";:'i:';'~:';;'" .' '. '. .','. ~~.'" ~. . ( . .', ".: ~. I.' ... . :':TOTA.L PA YED AREAS..;.u~;~.:;:;~..:;.~..................;... -z:.~"i"C:> ~. .... . ~ .' ,....=. . ;," .. . . : ,( ". ;:" :'. :.' ::. ...... n. :':,. '.:.. .~:. .\'.. ':'..> ..' ...:...... ", . .' - ~ '.'.' ',. ..: .: ....... : '. .T.QT:AL' ".D.E C](s..", ""~"t. ':'~':"~'~'~"'" ~;...',. ...:,. ..,'~ .... ,..,..~, ..'~ ;~'~.. II ..~':.', . . '" ":, . " "," '. . . 'iro;Ai~".IMP~~V;OUS" SUl~FACE ;~ri~~~' .. ................... ..... ........ ,: P~~p'~re..~,BX @)~~~(;~,J... ..q ,.... . .. . , ' . '." " .\. , , · . .ztA\l~'( '5\)~\J~ ~.t~6'~AP;\\. Ph8~~#\:lA1 ~ ~~,( 6 'Ljqii- I. " . . '. , . ," ,",I ,,': ", .1," ~ Thr ernlrr 0' Itlt I..." COatfttl')' ATTACHMENT 3 White . BlJlldlny Canary . Engineering Pink . Planning BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION DEPARTMENT CHECKLIST r:' . ("/ ~ NAtvlE OF APPLICANT, '/ h, .. .', 'It,.1 -' -c. / ' APPLICATION RECEIVED l,h;)f5 The Building, Engineering, and PI::\nning Departments have reviewed the bUilding permit application for construction activity which is proposed at: /;-s-tl 7 CaL-J::; Accepted Accepted With Corrections Denied ~ ~. Reviewed By:, \ -I Comments: .J-, (---''/ -r/~ ~ \~/-~, /""/ ---.~' -I- r- Date: 2-. I l- ~ -.:.:.. pit,;;,.....'>. ,'2.::::..'--.)\ D::>' ....,~-=-(<-, ,.::> ) -\-'" ',. r .:J 12, );, ..h:- c....... _..~(C- I ~ (,..::yrf.~ ,~~, 3: - ~c4.1;\l,'~"r_ \ , [c_"'>\....J"" c-V_ -4 .......~ ~~~ c\":;""-G..~~ / ":DcAv"c.:>~ ~--,{~~-:2<..~ I \~ )" '\2.c -~.. -,~ ~~ s,J,- / \ K...,.~ t..., - '"- . \.. f...:::::...2- rG::(v 0 I r~~ l::::J- ~,L~;r I . ti:-/'....~.\ I Y'~z I V"'\c.. ~A", I ~ ."-...J ' ("'~p~''''''- 1~'V'-) I <......:- 0V'~ (/~r.:..~ "The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or all approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid." . . t li I, I j'-1 1" 11 \ ~ f ~ ':'; <<:, ;!~ {'Jki, rL/-<J~s- X~ ~-""" ~ v J!._ crl .,/ ~L ~ t-- . ~j-, It White .. Building Canary .. Engineering Pink .. Planning n... ('tn..., or H... tlkt Co.n.,., BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION DEPARTMENT CHECKLISI t NAME OF APPLICANT _' . I / :,/ ':' ' ~. .! ,.-. / . ~~II"---~Jh7r 1./ I / 1 j , APPLICATION RECEIVED The ,Building, Engineering, and Planning Departments have reviewed the building permit application for construction activity which is proposed at; I, " , L: Accepted Denied ~ Reviewed By: "3!:/ Accepted With Corrections --'- ./ ()fl pit' 6tft~r r. ,~t-/c(~,l! c olub (&-0\,:)'~' V' \ 11 \\'vI" U\I\I) (,..:u,i). V" ",0 I ..1(..'- i),l (.. (.JV" \ (\ I Date: :J, 1- 9'j 11 Comments: J.(!j- (cf .A,I ?A///f'L/J ' , 't 0 . /i7/J/r{c!:m$' ~ r,e<< /cJ .:Ii c<C}-. ,; r I:~ j"u4 ~. ";1~ POI! <1 - IN-V i 1(7 tV J.uJp.. ?~qzJX'~ M,;/,lM;/({;1/, -;{;;U1!tu ~ '40." tff( ./ vcbr%' .. fIz';'; 51.' "<N' /l?dM/~'" /Yh) .0L/{CI7?J1 Ct- ~/t~ ~ ;:J;(~j){l-rJ/t{) //2/IsJ;:)L q-l/-! t"t.f ~~~h{-N_j- atlJm;; LH' 01 71Jf.3 ~ ahW? t l ~ 1- OI/bIjL gmJo, iJJ ,Mff,RE{)1t k 9;)1, 1:S o.djae.elJ-fn~ m ariMiIYl - :X-/f)(J('lJ 0-1:. a1 {(lei U(lW{11.(O~ i.L . VII' - 1 f -6'5 - (" Y I cduhlJ(Q. >, '6' ~~U~ [) lttfi.! IM1U , "The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or canc9/ the provisions of this code or other ordinances of the jurisJiction shall not be valid." 6 ' r14 r , * f(l{V?:U1'VL1'Y\ D(lVfO..tLy {)fj0f{1 cdf ff\Y (f~Yi L,j ex . 6*-. I 0:/13/1995 11::6 51:938155: February 13, 1995 City of Prior Lake Building Inspector Gary Stabler Dear' Gary, JUSTUS PAGE 01 Kurt Hazekamp brought to my attention: the 30% impervious surface requirement entry roof. We will delete this piece floor l~vel is approximately 36" above a stair & platform to the front door. drawing is required, please call me at Sincerely, ~ Ron Buchanan -',if the building exceeds because of the front of roof. The first grade which requires If an addendum 938-2741. t " . . ~; I~ ') 'i I.', .~.~. . l~ n~ 1 l .~ ~ u << ,~ "Hi ORLAKEPIJ\NNING Ami] SORY Cmfr>1T SSl ON -"---"-"-~'"'-~'--'-'_."~ ---..-'-----..-.-~._~,....'~___4.__'__ APPLlCATION FOR VAR lANCE FROM TilE rr~lJmEI.1ENTS OF 'IHE ZONING or([1IN~,NCE of. Appl i cant or Agent ..-2-::':":U..LLf.I-S2L.C:.:::iu:! (,~..___._____..I'holie_!:::::,~~.2:::::'._,.2..~il...._._ of Applicant Lp'.-,:~_Yc;:_!s.~t-._..jJ:ZL.lL~s._.S~;;;"-.____.._._____._______ and Number of Affected Premises .. ...__.._.___ i . c' :)~.;...-.......-. ..;~-..- -......: - 'ZHd'-. .-.. -j -. .- J.. ,~i 7 ~_ ),: , L~!_.fr~~..J~_Li~_ G r~j'l..!J_~~~!...!.'-___.__ d S' fT' r' . . . " / j! I' . _ r.~ 3n cJ 7.C 0 .mproven/ent sNow r;, Xl S t 1 ng l ,./:-,-,-LCk_0..,_..Ilij.ULJ(.'DL.."__3 1....:"5._..'",?..::.. ..._......_.___......._ ZonIng Classification Description of the Va.riance Arp1ie~, ;orX>::;"ii (~., "'1;r'L~_L'.::.J) nl1 e"frrl;k.f ~ I , I ' ~ J I ~.::_J~ J~~_~_~.:...,:. ._... ._~~-,~:,_ii_.__.__..... _._..__..._U.'.._ _,,___~..._._._.,___....,,_.__~__..___._ ___ V;ni arlce is Being App 1 i cd For ~.1.:J..5l.!.~:,k:, /..~'-;;.,L11 <tJ'L!::.{ratr;. d'::~__~:i.! ~_L....~:_ j:~'!::..'=-'C_!:_.J:.'!:.....b.;,_J.~L Irt { ~__1..r.l'W'-~. Ac '-' ~ "'---!!.!:i -. '''/ .~J..~~jL"i1'.!:J,. "~Lh';"'.~:..J~J=.:L!:..l,:,,.r{ ... ~~ -{'''II} f", ~ uvt:Jl-Nl' of a plat plan, showing the ~cation of all existing and proposed 'c":" be filed with this application. . r. The Fol1owing: L.iteral enforcement of the OrdinnnFc would rC'sult in 1lndue hardship with respect to , my property. No+- j?.:__ r sIb I..: .-----.-------.--. -_....~- - -----..--------------..-..--'__0 Such unnccessalY hardship results because of ci rcumstances unique to my property. The hardship is caused by provIsIons of the ordinance and is not the result of actions of persons presently having an interest in my parcel. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance and produces substantial justice, and is not contrary to the public interest. requirements are met. Q --C' /J / .. . /. L. I ," f5/ Sl gnature,/v .....--4"-. ___ I,) "V;?:: Y--j ~,,~ ,,'. / J' :z ~ '70- was received this /_~ day. of /jcriJ...c. 'L-- __ 19~ Received By___JJ,l/Lt// <:;~;.-<-U 71 - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - .- - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - permitt~d if all four i~ 78 is to ceTtify hat $ ,.;1 ,). D ') a Varjance Application Fee:--- for Variance Grant.ed TIns SPACE TO BJ:: FILLED IN BY PLANNING cm.fr>lISSION ')/ /,' \ Den i ed Remarks: ~. " ~ )'" ......... ' .~ ~ ~ 4", " '- " ". ........ . v..~ .IX ,\' .).. \J: .J ~I ~ ~ . ts .~ , \ , 1'/ /'- I ':: .:;l :~ ... ---..- , 'f'J. L. _ .'___ __ _-1 r , ......:-.\ IS:: ;:1 I "0 ,'~ "- I 't-:_ rl I '1\ .~ -. - '..... ~ , . ':" I. I ........ ,'~.9 ) , 1 I . . ~-_. I I __ _ _ _ } .. ~o; - ---,--:. ~I . :: '<'I :'NI J. "'I ... ... to-. " t'Cl t) " DrH'h,( /,..u '111 j ( 70~" r(~~vrJl ~; f t IIU{' P K. I J 9 CJ 5. :J IV.... 8M; rl", f () 7.5" \ I I. ..->\ --r \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ./~ .;-. -.- t j, ~ i 1, Pr/o r '- _Jr. j~ - . -, - -' 'c' l _I: i...- , --- ,," -- ~. - (~:'''') , I I ".- ~\ ~::'I' \ , ,.~/I , .. r" 1r1l0#. ''''IIOVW'' . I ' , 'l ~I\ I . _. -a \ l.!j 14" -;r "'" - '2 1_- ::i ~ :.: ~ =-: ;: 3 :::. ' C:',- .. I L~~ , l I .' i ~. .'" I I ""'1\ . - - - - - .1 tl ......... ~ N ~~ ctcO tr) " '- '?' .... Lei '1 "/. 1 -00 ~of- B i. \t' If( er --~ 6 'lO ~- ~ ..... . \(. 0 ~ CQ . 13' >. : - I " /'< ", 1'1' '" ('CI../ j~ t{ j) d 'l; '1: l; ., . CITY 0 F PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372 ~'- -- ..".....L;~..... .7....",..._...:....'.-. }-...'.-r~~' ".i "~"~:':.;.<0d:":(,;' . PRIOR LAKE PLANNING ADVISORY CO~1.\lISS]QN April 6, 1978 The meeting of the ^pril 6, 1978 Prior Lake I'l:mning Commission was cal1ed to order by Chuirman Thorkelson at 7:30 PM. Members present were Commissioners Cavill, Speikcr, Johnson, Councilman Busse and City Planner Graser. The minutes of the March 16, 1978 Planning Commission were motioned for approval by Johnson seconded by Speikcr and upon a vote ta~en were. approved as published. Mr. Graser stated that he would like to add an item to the agenda. Motion was made by Cavill to discuss a proposed subdivision for Carlson & Carlson at 10:30 PM seconded by Speiker and upon a vote taken motion carried. First item on the agenda was a subdivision discussion for Mr. Dick Schwartz. Mr. Schwartz is proposing to develop the Vic SchroedE:r 24 acre farm. 1-fr. Graser gave a presentation siting low areas, grade problems and access to Eagle Creek Avenue. Mr. Schwartz stated that he was in agreement with Mr. Graser I s proposal as to the drive'~ays not fronting on Eagle C:i'eek Avenue (County Road 21). questions were raised on the interceptor easements, lak~ access, soil compaction from the interceptor and total number of lots. The overall vie~ of the Planning Commission was that the plan looked feasible and the developer was asked to continue working with staff to work out any additional problems. ><Next item on the agenda was a variance application for Mr. George Borgerding. A 63 foot lakeshore setback variance and an 8 foot front yard variance are requested for lot 9 and the south 42 feet of lot 10, North Grainwood. The proposal is to remove the existing buildings and replace it with a year- round home. Mr. Graser gave a description of the parcel inovlved. Motion was made by Speiker to grant the variance due to the fact that the new dwelling will encompass the old building envelope and it is a unique lot and will be a permanent, year round home. Motion was seconded by Cavi 11 upon a vote taken, ~otion carried. Next item on the agenda was a Home Occupation Permit application for Mr. Bruce Langevin. Mr. Langevin is proposing to construct light, two wheel, horse drawn carriages at his place of residence, 16078 Cambridge Circle SE. The parcel is zoned R-l. Planner Graser ga'.e a brief description of the request a'. Mr. Langevin then stated that he; llas an air conditioning unit and extra soundproofing in the garage. He a':'so stated that the noised.,es .not bother his wife who is immediately above him in the house. A petition was then given to tl:~ Chairman with 16 signatures of the neighbor's in .opposi tion to the home occupation permit. Cavill motioned to Geny the home occupation permit because of oppositivn of the neighbors and the occupation is not incompliance with the ordinance. Motion was seconded by motion carried. , .. ATTACH{v1ENT 5 COFl OF f IOf 10 ,_- ,,- tJ"" 10 Norfh line 0 ----r- \~.,[."" - -' \ I \ , ~T rill H T~P 908,91 '0 i \ t l+ p.~\..\.. 1" \ f VI ~f06f 0 1t '!~.1!5 . I I~ ~ '~,. '".''. .~ ..~"'~~ r '~.:~,\:; \~ \-; .-~ , \ " 1.,' I~' ~~ c... . i~- .u ;;: 1 Cl ll\ lco ...... ... - CI) . .. N. i~ ::S' l~ ~. .. %.. ~ ~: 0'0 .... - o ~ tl Itl .s · ,~ i, pR\ ~ ;~ ~ .~ if .' ,t': ~ ). It 1',...6 _IS I:o~ 0Sf. t\ 0 aUf ..t.1t901.16 f,\. \ -.t~ ~\ C9~.!,-"" --- I;. , , l' 'i >- .. q \&J l\j U) (l;) - t k. II ..J o ~ ...... 9\1.19 1 "\. . C.'" '" . 5'" 911. ..OQ!9 " II \\ .1 II 1 67 t . - I .- "w I " - - - · 26 I I 0 .--l sw cor. of .5 79 eO' 10' 9 10' lil 5 I , Y I' n . \ . of I of B W'I),lln. OF fjEG pT', \ \ / " It / PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: 4D CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE O'LOUGHLIN PROPERTY JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR _X_ YES NO-N/A MARCH 26, 2001 PRESENTER: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: INTRODUCTION: Centex Homes and John O'Loughlin have filed an application to develop the property located on the west side of CSAH 83, If4 mile south of CSAH 42, in the East Yz of the Northwest If4 of Section 28, Township 115 North, Range 22 West. The request includes the following: . Approve a Conditional Use Permit for a cluster development; . Approve a Preliminary Plat. The proposal calls for a mixed-use development consisting of a total of 122 dwelling units on 33.87 net acres, for a total density of 3.6 units per acre. The proposed development includes 54 single family dwellings and 68 dwelling units in 17 four-unit buildings. The development also includes private open space and a public park. The Planning Commission considered this request at a public hearing on March 12, 2001. The staff and the Planning Commission identified several issues pertaining to this development. The Planning Commission tabled this give the developer the opportunity to sign a waiver of the 60- day deadline for action. On March 20,2001, the Planning staff received a letter from the applicant requesting this item be tabled until April 9, 2001. The City Council is scheduled to act on the proposed rezoning on April 2, 2001. The applicant has requested this extension because the results of the rezoning should be known by then. The applicant is aware an extension of the 60-day rule will be required if this item is scheduled for April 9th. ACTION REQUIRED: A motion and second continuing the public hearing to April 9, 2001. ] :\0 1 files\O 1 subdivisions\prelim plat\eentex\eentex pe2.doe 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 03/20/01 08:45 FAX 9529367839 CENTEX HOMES CENTEX HOMES Fax Transmittal DATE: March 20, 2001 TO: OF: FAX.: Jane Kansier City of Prior Lake Planning Department 952-447-4245 steve Acn ,..../ ~ Land Deve~rrfent Manager Centex Homes - Minnesota (952) 936-7833 x221 Fax (952) 936-7839 FROM: RE: PAGES: Extension to ;:Ipplication deadline 4 page(s) total, including this cover sheet IaI 001 12400 Whitewaler Drive Suite 1ZD Mlnnetonkll, Minnesota 55343 Phone: 612..936-7833 Fax: 612.936-7839 AS we discussed last Friday, it appears that Centex has until April 20, 2001 before lhe 60 day application tirneline is reached. I would like to defer signing the waiver until after the APril 9, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting. According to your letter dated March 13, 2001 your recommendation will be to deny our application if the waiver is not signed. Based on the 50-day review period expiring on April 20, 2001, I would request your support to have the Planning Commission table our application to the A.pril 9, 2001 meeting. HopefullY the City council will have acted on th. r.zoning request at the April 2. 200'1 meeting allowing the Planning Cornmitision to make a recommendation on the preliminary plat and conditional use permit Please let me know if there is any additional information you need regarding this ite'~l. PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: PRESENTER: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: 6A REVIEW REQUEST TO VACATE A 10' WIDE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED WENSMANN 1ST ADDITION JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR YES X NO-N/A MARCH 26, 2001 INTRODUCTION This easement is located in the western portion of Wensmann 1 sl Addition, and is included within Lot 4, Block 1, Lots 29-32, and 37, Block 5, and Lots 4, 10, 11, 30-33, Block 6. The easement was originally platted in The Wilds 41h Addition. Wensmann 1 sl Addition was platted in 2000. This existing 10' wide easement was not vacated prior to the final plat approval, so the easement encroaches into the buildable area of the new lots. The vacation of this easement is necessary to build on the affected lots. As required by State Statute 462.356 Subd.2, the Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the disposal or acquisition of public lands as it relates to compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Upon proper notification, State Statute 412.851 allows the Council to vacate easement or right-of-way by resolution. The statute also states "no such vacation shall be made unless it appears to be in the public interest to do so". DISCUSSION The Planning Commission must make two determinations. Does the vacation of the existing easement comply with the Comprehensive Plan and is there a public need or anticipated future need for the dedicated property? Comprehensive Plan Review The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically discuss utility easements, other than as a function of ensuring access to public utilities. The vacation of this 1:\01 files\OI vacalions\01-013\01-013 pc report.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 easement is not inconsistent with any specific goal or objective of the Comprehensive Plan. The necessary easements were dedicated as part of Wensmann 151 Addition. Public Need There are no existing utilities located within this easement. As noted above, the necessary easements for the new lots were dedicated as part of the final plat of Wensmann 151 Addition. RECOMMENDATION The necessary easements were included in Wensmann 151 Addition. There is no public need for this 10' easement. Vacation of the easement will allow construction on the new lots. The Planning staff therefore recommends approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend the City Council approve the proposed vacation of the easement as presented or with changes recommended by the Commission. 2. Continue the discussion to a date and time certain to allow the staff to provide additional information specifically requested by the Planning Commission. 3. Based upon expressed findings of fact, recommend the City Council deny part or all of the applications based upon inconsistency of the proposal with specific regulations of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and/or specific policies of the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative #1. ACTION REQUIRED: Motion and second to recommend the City Council approve the vacation of the easement as requested. 1:\01 files\0Ivacations\01-013\01-01 3 pc report.doc 2 9O'1rr ! Ai..6l:.o;'OON L -. _. _ _ -'. _ _ _ _ _ _ J u .... Vl Ll:::l: Ow Vl < W Ot4r":'~;:~~ I g~~~~ I woo~~ I Gl-,_-,_ I , Z 2: ~ ~m <q. ...<!" III '" ~~~co ;;i!::ti!: ~"'!.!5 ~~jl1) - , ......... :! S :f:r.t-l.6. Zt::'~Vl...,a: ~~~Qi!~ g:;'"i5ij: P") . 0 N ,., 0; cD N .., cP t. N 0. J'I III ~ ... "' r :..) 'OJ ~n N N <" N ~.. ~~ I E~I t% ~~I 10 .., .,; ~ to .. - N 10 ci a: o u '-' .... l::l 1= en F= "It 10 - ~i 51'Lal M.!;~.Lo.lON 2 III '" .,; " N , . , '..~ l{) I . I, .. ,/ ..'" f'rOUlOOY Hit SaM /~," , ~' .., l... llld 1 NlI1]S Yl ! '" .u.nu.n. ):)VMYHQ , .,; IZl .., ~ o it . CO .., ;., P 1lll lID Z I- '~7'09' />_79 O~.50 ~O.71 P :.. 1': ~: ::. ~ .. ~ C'.. _--______, ,_ . ..' ~~ -- f>.,.,~~~- '-.>. .~r:~t.9r-\7 .:: '/ ,I;, , 4"foj ~ 36BZ-~ ,/ ---------.~-- t. -"~ W ;:>....... _CZBl /~//--:;. ..~ ."" ,J: ,- - . "'!~ < .?j~" '~r'~'-" .,.:~ 0 t ' -------.-'..1!':.~f'.. f <1'1., . " ,/ .a..~,.~iOe-"I> : .0.._ "\..1"'_ -t".o,. ....... '! " ~ ~ '" III Z .., N Gl .... o ~ B -oo..J L -::~d3t -f.....,. ....Q I .,.. I I .:. i r'~e- ~tf I : .tf.9S"~ I . CO~S / PLANNING REPORT PRESENTER: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: 6B REVIEW REQUEST TO VACATE A 10' WIDE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OUTLOT A, THE WILDS 2ND ADDITION JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR _YES X NO-N/A MARCH 26, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION Northwood Oaks Estates 2nd Addition was originally platted in July, 2000. A 25' wide drainage and utility easement was platted along the south property line of Lot 17, Block 1, to accommodate the placement and maintenance of a sewer line. While the final plat identified a 25' wide easement at this location, the construction plans indicated a 20' wide easement. Karl and Denise Tremmel are in the process' of purchasing this lot. The house they plan on the lot was based on the 20' wide easement shown on the construction plans. The 25' wide easement was discovered when the purchasers had a survey drawn to locate the house on the lot. The applicants are requesting the vacation of 5' of the 25' wide easement. The purpose of this petition is to allow the construction of a new dwelling on this lot. As required by State Statute 462.356 Subd.2, the Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the disposal or acquisition of public lands as it relates to compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Upon proper notification, State Statute 412.851 allows the Council to vacate easement or right-of-way by resolution. The statute also states "no such vacation shall be made unless it appears to be in the public interest to do so". DISCUSSION The Planning Commission must make two determinations. Does the vacation of the existing easement comply with the Comprehensive Plan and is there a public need or anticipated future need for the dedicated property? 1:\01 files\Ol vacations\01-018\01-018 pc report.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 Comprehensive Plan Review The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically discuss utility easements, other than as a function of ensuring access to public utilities. The vacation of this easement is not inconsistent with any specific goal or objective of the Comprehensive Plan. The City Engineer has noted a 20' wide easement is sufficient for the location and the maintenance of the existing sewer line. Public Need There is an existing sanitary sewer line located within this easement. As noted above, the City Engineer has noted a 20' wide easement is sufficient for the location and the maintenance of the existing sewer line. The approval of this vacation would allow the construction of a new dwelling on this property. RECOMMENDATION The intent of the Comprehensive Plan is satisfied by retaining 20' of the existing easement. Furthermore, a 20' wide easement is sufficient to protect and maintain the existing sanitary sewer line. The Planning staff therefore recommends approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Recommend the City Council approve the proposed vacation of the easement as presented or with changes recommended by the Commission. 2. Continue the discussion to a date and time certain to allow the staff to provide additional information specifically requested by the Planning Commission. 3. Based upon expressed findings of fact, recommend the City Council deny part or all of the applications based upon inconsistency of the proposal with specific regulations of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and/or specific policies of the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative #1. ACTION REQUIRED: Motion and second to recommend the City Council approve the vacation of the easement as requested. ]:\01 files\OI vacations\01-018\01-018 pc report.doc 2 N CD 10 1 045. S ~E: . ...-]- L" , I N01 '01 '03"W 10 "" '~ ~ Ii is ~~ ~~ g~ >e 0, t.,' "" , ( o ". I ~ " ~ I ... I I o Qt. ~C' ~< 318.04 ....\ / g9''"'''", ot:a~o'oo ~.. 0 o~ o,\~~~q,q. I ~~ - ~-_.-.---- ?~ RR17Fi I. R<=l :IN T :>-r=r=!N T :IN'=! ;>;'=!'=!Nn T <"i wn;>; -I w\tf?;::::: I. qFiKLd';?- I