Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout031201 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, MARCH 12, 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 of 25.58 acres to be subdivided into 78 lots for townhouse units on the property located on the west side of CSAH 21 approximately ¼ mile north of CSAH 82. (Continuedfrotn the February 26, 2001 meeting) 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, ¼ mile south of CSAH 42, in the East ½ of the NW ¼ 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. 5. Old Business: 6. New Business: A. 2000 Annual Variance Report B. 2000 Annual Complaint Report 7. Announcements and Correspondence: 8. Adjournment: L:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcagenda\ag031201. DOC 16200 Ea§le Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, MARCH 12, 2001 1. Call to Order: Chairman Vonhof 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 Present Criego Present Lemke Present Stamson Present Vonhof Present 3. Approval of Minutes: The Minutes from the February 26, 2001, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. Commissioner Vonhof 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 of CSAH 21 approximately ¼ mile north of CSAH 82. (Continued from 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, IA mile south of CSAH 42, in the East ~ of the NW ~A of Section 28, Township 115 North, L:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminutes\mn031201 .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 of CSAH 83, ¼ mile south of CSAH 42, in the East ½ of the Northwest ¼ 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 length of 500 feet. 4. The peoposed 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:\01 files\01 plancomm\01pcminutes~mn031201 .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 staff's concems 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 Commtmity 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:\01 files\01 plancomm\0 ! pcrninutes\mn031201 .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 zoning. Lemke: · Agreed with Criego's comments. · Agreed the existing slopes are not a big issue. · Liked this proposal better than a dense development. Vonhof: · Concurred with the Commissioners' cormnents. · 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 PUD project. · Ach said they typically have sidewalks and can put them in. Atwood: · Questioned the applicant (Ach) if he 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:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminuteshmn031201 .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 STAMSON, 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\Olplancomm\O1 pcminutes\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 o f 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\01 plancomm\01 pcminutes\mn031201 .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 if there 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 staff has 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:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminutes~nn031201 .doc 7