Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout022696REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, February 26, 1996 7:00 p.m. 4.B Call Meeting to Order: Roll Call: Approval of Minutes: Public Hearings: PHEASANT MEADOWS - PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE SCHEMATIC PUD, REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT. 12.5 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF STH 13, SOUTH OF 170TH STREET AND EAST OF SUNSET HILLS ADDITION. REPEAL OF SECTION 6-3-1 OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REGARDING ABBREVIATED SUBDIVISION PROCESS. Old Business: New Business: 1995 Variance Summary Report. Announcements and Correspondence: Adjournment: 16200 Fang~gCa~k Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota f~F~72-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Februar~ 26, 1996 The February 26, 1996, Planning Commission Meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Criego at 7:03 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Criego, Loftus, Vonhof and Wuellner, Planning Director Don Rye, Assistant Planner Deb Garross, Associate Planner Michael Leek and Recording S_ecretary Connie Carlson. ROLL CALL: Wuellner Present Vonhof Present Loft-us Absent Kuykendall Absent Criego Present REVIEW OF THE PREVIOUS MINUTES: Add Commissioner Wuellner to the first paragraph as being present. MOTION BY WUELLNER, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 12, 1996, MINUTES. Votes taken signified ayes by Wuellner, Vonhof and Criego. MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARINGS TO CONSIDER THE SCHEMATIC PUD, REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR "PHEASANT MEADOW". The public hearing open at 7:07 p.m. and a sign-up sheet was circulated to the public in attendance. Assistant Planner Deb Garross presented the information from the Planning Report dated February 26, 1996. Staff recommends adoption of Resolution 96-04PC, (recommending the City Council approve the Schematic PUD of Pheasant Meadow), Ordinance 96-06, (recommending the City Council approve the rezoning of the site to PUD), and Resolution 96-05PC, (recommending the City Council approve the preliminary plat of Pheasant Meadow subject to the conditions outlined.) or recommend the City Council approve Resolution 96-04PC, Ordinance 96-06, and Resolution 96-05PC with changes specifically directed by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Loftus arrived at 7:30 p.m. A recess was called at 7:50 p.m The meeting reconvened at 7:55 p.m. MN022696.DOC PAGE I Terry Schneider, with Project Developers, spoke on behalf for the applicant, Williams Development LLC. Mr. Schneider explained the reasons for the proposed development: · To create as much value for both the future residents occupying the site as well the City and the surrounding neighborhoods; · Provide a good transition between the single family neighborhood and the natural area of the park as well as the p.o_tential commerical to the east. Mr. Schneider spoke on the issues of connecting the development to Balsam Street; the City's position in connecting neighborhood streets; reduction of a 2-unit townhome; screening and berming the development; noise and the parking lot; ponding and trails; and traffic flow. Mr. Schneider presented overheads showing the orientation of the units, the public roads and the need to delete # 17 of the Conditions. They are also asking for a minor modification in Condition # 10 regarding the sidewalks/trails which would give them flexibility on positioning units with the trails. He has a concern with the exact trail design, height and location which has not been finalized by the Park Department. When this is determined the developer will work with staff. There was a neighborhood meeting with approximately 10 to 12 residents. The developers listened to their feedback and the general preference was not to connect Balsam Street. The neighbors preferred single family homes and if the decision went to townhomes, have as many 2 unit buildings as possible. There is one 4 unit bui.lding toward 170th Street. Comments from the audience: Nancy Coyle, 3471 Balsam St. NW, through interpreter, Dinah Petrykas, said she would prefer the City not have the Balsam Street go through because the townhouses are going to be next to the family neighborhoods. She feels it will look strange with the street going through the two different developments. She is concerned for the rain water runoff and the effects. Mrs. Coyle would like the dead end street especially with the children. Their land is fairly high and where the street would come through now would have a drop offon their property. The Coyles' have an electric fence to guard their dogs. They can't be watching their kids all the time. She is concerned for safety. Darrell Coyle, 3471 Balsam Street, NW, through interpreter, Dinah Petrykas pointed out two of the proposed houses that would be built next to his house. He is concerned for the people who have boats and trailers and where they would park and/or store them. (Mr. Schneider responded the townhouse association would limit outdoor storage.) Mr. Coyle said when he was building his house he chose to build on that particular lot because it was a dead end. MN022696 DOC PAGE 2 Dennis Lawman, 17007 Sunset Trail SW, objected to keeping Balsam St. closed because of the speed limit on 170th is 45 mph which he feels is to too fast. All the neighborhood kids walk down Balsam Street to get to the park. He feels with Balsam Street open to the development, there would be too much extra traffic. Mr. Lawman wanted to know if the Council could plan out another road access and eliminate Balsam. John Adler, 3443 Spruce Trail,._stated it was his understanding the property proposed as a PUD was a single family development. He wonders why the PUD is better for the City and the neighbors compared to a single family development. He understands it is not as attractive to a buyer. The City has not given any thought with the impact of the additional 100 to 140 people and how the traffic is going to affect the intersection (STH 13 & CR). Mr. Adler is opposed to the development for two reasons: As a landowner he doesn't see where does it benefits him. More importantly he don't see the City or developer taking into consideration the adverse affects of the traffic on CR 12 and Highway 13. The City should pull the statistical reports of personal injury/motor vehicle accidents on Highway 13 from CR 42 to CR 12. He believes the majority of people being hurt are at this intersection and he is therefore against the development. John Wingard, Assistant City Engineer, responded that the City has looked at the entire Highway 13 corridor and this intersection is the highest priority to re-do and upgrade. The City is looking at re-routing 170th Street to cut in by the Triangle Car Wash. Another issue the City is looking at is to add more of right turn lane to separate the Highway. Deb Garross explained the City is limited because CR 12 is controlled by Scot4 County and Highway 13 is controlled by the State. Those roads were not designed to handle the traffic. They were built as rural roads. The City has to work with the other entities. Larry Anderson, City Engineer, explained MNDOT's view of Highway 13 and 170th. MNDOT has made it their highest priority to improve it. They made a commitment last year and make the improvements Mr. Adler was concerned about. John Wingard explained the storm water runoff. Donald Taft, 3425 Spruce Trail, expressed he was glad to hear the pond was opening up. In the 8 years he lived here the pond has dried up and is happy to see this improved. His biggest concern is the traffic congestion. His other point was the existing townt~ omes across from the Willows are not selling well. He doesn't think this development should be a PUD. Carl Tremmel, 3399 Balsam Street, said he and his neighbors are very much against Balsam Street going through. Mr. Tremmel explained his concern for the traffic and congestion. The neighborhood children are consistently out in the yards and that is why he bought a house in the area. He is opposed to changing to a PUD from R1. Mr. Tremmel said he checked the area before he built 2 years ago and it was an R1 district. MN022696DOC PAGE That is why he moved from the cities with the multiple housing and crowded lots to Prior Lake. There is a similar development across the street. The addition of cars will increase the congestion in the intersection. He would like to keep it a small town feel. Paul Hofslien, 3340 Spruce Circle, echoed Mr. Tremmel's comments. It would be a major mistake to connect Balsam. He moved to this area for the same reasons to get away from the City. He feels t.h_e townhomes are wrong for the area. Mr. Hofslien wanted to know if there was a market research done to show that a single family neighborhood will not sell. He also feels the developer has to be specific with targeting either first time buyers or empty nesters. Mr. Hofslien questioned why the City is switching from RI. John Freer, 3404 Balsam Street, objects to connecting Balsam Street. There are many children and the traffic concerns him. Don Rye, Planning Director, commented on some of the points brought up. One gentleman brought up the fact he checked the property before he bought it and it was RI. The Comprehensive Plan has had it zoned for multiple family since 1981. The second response is if the R1 is left intact the maximum number of units that could be built will be in the neighborhood of 42 to 44 single family homes as opposed to the 50 townhomes. The traffic generation between 42 single family homes and 50 townhomes is negligible. Hans Freese, 3535 Spruce Trail, had a concern for lake traffic on Prior Lake. The traffic is heavy in the summer. There are so many boats parking in the development already the additional traffic would be outrageous. Chris Sexe, 3353 Spruce Trail, questioned the property value of the units. (Terry Schneider responded $130,000 to $170,000 in cost and the size approximately 1,100 sq. ft). Mr. Sexe thinks this could be done with higher valued townhomes. He also feels the neighborhood is concerned the townhomes will bring down the sale of their homes. Larry Anderson, City Engineer, addressed the neighborhood connection issue of Balsam Street. The street connection was installed as part of the original subdivision and is paved to the property line with the intention to provide for interneighborhood connections. Most old neighborhoods are not connected and causes a problem for maintenance. It is nice to be able to get from one neighborhood to another without going on Highway 13 or CR 12. The fear for a lot of traffic generated and using Balsam Street to bypass CR 12 is not realistic. There will be some traffic. People on CR 12 are going to stay on CR12. Deb Garross explained why the development is not proposed single family. One of the main issues the City found in doing a housing study was that there are very few (2.8%) alternative housing units available in Prior Lake. The City has an obligation based on it's adopted Livable Communities Act and also the Comprehensive Plan to provide a fair share goals of alternative housing and value for a range of residents. The Comprehensive Plan specifically states neighborhoods should be connected, the site is intended to be MN022696. DOC PAGI~ 4 developed as medium density residential, which is consistent with the proposal. This property is not in the Shoreland District, nor a flood plain, there are no steep slopes, no existing wetlands, it is between collector and arterial streets, and it abuts commerical property. Due to these conditions the site is more suitable for higher density development than single family homes. Comments from Commissioners: Wuellner: · Appreciated pointing out the adopted Comprehensive Plan. · He looks for a trade off for the City with a PUD. The Comp Plan states "platting will be encouraged through larger PUD's to preserve natural features." There is nothing in this lot to preserve. It is just an open field. I don't feel it is fitting as a PUD in the strictest sense and why we have them. · Deb Garross responded that this is proposed as a PUD is just one of the reasons, but there are a number of reasons. The development gets a higher amount of open space with a PUD. The City gains. The developers are not asking any deviation of setbacks. They are also not asking for a density increase. The units in this PUD provides 50% open space, a single family development would get 10%. Also, Balsam Street was always intended to extend to the next development. The existing subdivision was put in 1987. The subdivision requirement was to provide access to adjacent property. · The Comp Plan Land Use Map says this land is urban residential. Where did the medium residential density come from? · Deb Garross said it is in both the 2000 and the 2010 Plans. · Don Rye explained at the time the Council considered the plan they did at one time have a medium density category called out separately from the low density. The Council felt they would prefer to combine them with the idea the areas that were medium density were going to occur and thought the City would address this through a PUD process. Wueller's recognition of the Livable Community Act in the Comp Plan, in recognizing that as being part of the Comp Plan, the City identifies certain parts of the community that would as we envision in the next 15 years would be the medium or ' high density neighborhoods areas and does not remember this land mentioned. · Does not see how $130,000 to $170,000 townhome makes us conform to the Livable Community Act. To pay $170,000 for a townhome is not more livable than a single family home. · Deb Garross explained the Livable Community Act. · Don Rye pointed out the land use designation was not done as part of the Livable Community Act. It was the Comp Plan discussion. What you are recalling are the areas designated for high density housing. The map itself does not indicate specific areas deemed medium density. This addresses life style issues as one of the six goals set out for Livable Community Act. Time table for CR 12. MN022696.DOC PAGE 5 · Larry Anderson explained the improvements to CR 12 are not in the Scott County 5 year Capital Improvement Plan. The intersection at CR 12 and Highway 13 was proposed by MNDOT as part of a cooperative agreement and the process to improve the intersection. MNDOT indicated last fall they were reserving money for improvements to the intersection for safety. Anderson anticipates MNDOT completing the intersection within 2 years. There is no room to build CR 12 beyond the 2 lanes. The City had a_lot of difficulty widening CR 44 with the neighbors. The developer has made strong points with the orientation of the buildings. What the City is pointing out is when CR 12 gets updated the City doesn't want the people saying they don't want the up grade. · Trail plan. Deb Garross explained the proposed plan. · Can see public safety and aesthetically reasons to extend Balsam Street. A lot of kids walk across to Willow's park and is extremely dangerous. · Could the City put in a bike trail instead of connecting Balsam Street to get the kids off CR12 to have a safer passage? · Deb Garross responded it was possible but not recommended. · Terry Schneider said the developer's target market is primarily for the rambler units toward the empty nester market. The 4 unit buildings would most likely be targeted at young professionals and people with kids. 75% would most likely go to empty nesters because of the style and low maintenance. Vonhof.' · Question to Staff regarding zoning and the advantages of the PUD. Deb Garross said there are a number of things. There is a more positive increase for business., trail system is proposed either in a standard subdivision or a PUD but a PUD gives more open space because the homes are clustered. A PUD provides less maintenance cost. There are several advantages to a PUD. Communities try to work with developers toward a PUD. · 6.24 acres of open space proposed in this PUD development. · What percent is in NURP ponding area? John Wingard estimated the bigger pond at 7/10th of an acre and the little one is about 0.2. · Developer brought up Item #10 of the Conditions - What is staff's response? Don Rye said the City does not have any problems with that. The City's concern was to ensure the sidewalk got down to the cul-de-sac area. If it works out to go somewhere else the City is willing to work it out. · Landscape Plan: Noticed all the trees are on the exterior of the land. Would like to see boulevard trees, the City has them in all our developments. · Deb Garross stated the Tree Preservation Ordinance was adopted after this proposed subdivision was submitted. There are quite a number of trees on the border. · Would like to see in the covenant that outside storage would be restricted. · Driveway alignment with street. · Balsam Street connection: It has been the City's experience in Prior Lake with the neighborhoods not connected have to go out onto Highway 13. That is a dangerous MN022696.DOC PAGE 6 situation compared to Balsam Street being connected. The Commission has seen in the past the problems that have arisen in not connecting the streets. We cannot plan on the County to update. Support Balsam connection. Loftus: · Project time line: Mr. Schneider said build out is anticipated to take 2 years to complete. · Concern for adding more traffic on CR 12 and another subdivision. · Common sense would tell me cars would drive through Sunset neighborhood to connect to CR 81. · The intersection at CR 12 and Highway 13 is substandard. · Is there some way to have road in place and have it temporarily bermed or something in such a way so the traffic does not go through yet until the City can get a long term traffic plan? Loftus referenced a Minneapolis situation. · Larry Anderson stated he is not sure how the City would do that. A decision has to be made to connect the neighborhoods or not. · Michael Leek, Associate Planner pointed out as an alternative that the developer pays for the connection, not the City. · Loftus reminded the Commissioners of a similar issue that came up in the Willows several years ago where a path was put in as opposed to a street. · Deb Garross reminded the Commissioners they are going against the City's Comp Plans. · Concern with health and welfare issue with the road through Sunset Hills, sloping down hill, neighborhood safety with traffic circulation. · Agrees with developer not to realign the 4 units on the northwest comer. · Trail issue in Condition #10 is okay. Criego: · There are two issues: Density and connecting Balsam Street. · The density issue does not create much of a problem. It is better to have a development like this with the open space it allows not only for the residents but for the neighboring residents to enjoy the space. The 6 to 8 families is not a major differential. · Understand everyone's point with Balsam Street going through. · Think of your children getting to the convenience store. The last thing you want is to have your children on CR 12. Over all, it is a benefit not a negative. · Some discussion of a temporary condition on the street. The problem is long term. The residents in the development are not going to use Balsam to get out of their property. The issue is people from the west coming up and using the new development as an exit point. · The street is not a major issue short term but could definitely be an issue long term once the development is in. MN022696.DOC PAGE 7 · Question to developer regarding single vs. double garages: Schneider said they are all double garages and it is their intent as part of the initial covenants to prohibit outdoor storage. · Split entries are around 1,100 sq. ft.; the ramblers are 1,150 to 1,200 and the lower levels/walk-out units if finished could have 1,800 to 2,000 sq. ft. · Schneider said their intent was to plant more trees on the sight but it is not per an ordinance, r~ · Developer complies with Condition item #9 and the 100 year flood. Commissioner Criego explained to the audience there would not be a public meeting at the City Council level. John Adler, 3443 Spruce Street, wanted to re-emphasize the City is putting the cart before the horse. The real safety issue is the intersection and there will be more people killed out there. Nobody is making a commitment to resolve that issue. He feels the City has an obligation to the people in this community to wait until something is done or to get a commitment from somebody before the City allows this development to be built. That is the issue. It is not a trail or the children walking to the convenient store. It is the additional traffic on CR 12 and Highway 13 on a very dangerous intersection. MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE SCHEMATIC PUD FOR PHEASANT MEADOW TO ALLOW A CLUSTER, TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT ON A 12.5 ACRE SUBJECT SITE IN RESOLUTION 96-04PC. Open Discussion: Wuellner said he does not feel a PUD is proper for this land. It is not the right tool for this piece of property. The people who live in this area who deal with this on a day to day basis have always operated under the notion that the area would be a residential single family community. That was the intent of the Balsam Street extension. My neighbors and I have always felt something was going to go in. A PUD is designed to help developers develop relatively difficult land. Them is a busy road involved but there are other options the developer can utilize to develop this land to What everyone thought the intent was. Loftus said he was troubled by the timing, not saying the PUD would be right. This accelerates the build out in the next 24 months. There are a lot of issues out there. The developer is meeting good goals the City is trying to accomplish but they are not addressing the issues of safety, health and welfare. Them will be more traffic with no visible improvements made. He is more against the timing of the development than the concept of townhomes going in. MN022696. DOC PAGE Don Rye pointed out in the absence of this development the City could take an application for a single family subdivision and within 120 days the Planning Commission would have to take action on it. Which means there could be houses there by the end of the summer. Legally the City has no recourse to stop that. As much as you would like to control the timing of the development, the ability to do that is limited. Deb Garross explained improvements to County and State roads are not made until certain warrants are met. Larry Anderson explained the greater the volume of traffic, the easier it is to make warrants. The sooner the improvements are made. MNDOT is committed to make improvements on Highway 13 and CR12. The City does not control the State and County. If it was in the City's budget and control it would have been corrected. Don Rye commented if the City adopts that logic, the Planning Commission should consider recommending to City Council that they impose a moratorium on all developments until all the transportation facilities are adequate to handle the projected development. Loftus: Neighbors are concerned about safety. There is so much negative feedback it should be postponed. Wuellner explained this is the most dangerous intersection in Prior Lake. Vonhof said infrastructure is always a problem. The City of Prior Lake has no jurisdiction over these roads. He agrees with everyone the City should do whatever it can to pressure to get improvements. Highway 13 has been here for years. Highway 13 would have been improved years ago if it was under a local jurisdiction. There are a lot of issues off site. Commissioner Vonhof withdrew his Motion and directed Staff to get information from MNDOT. MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY CRIEGO TO CONTINUE THE HEARING TO MARCH 11, 1996. Votes taken signified ayes by Vonhofi Creigo, Loftus and Wuellner. MOTION CARRIED. Terry Schneider, representing the developer stated he was going to be out of town and requested a different date for the heating. The public hearing will be continued to March 25, 1996. A recess was called at 9:59. The meeting reconvened at 10:07 p.m. MN022696.DOC PAGE 9 #2. REPEAL OF SECTION 6-3-1 OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REGARDING ABBREVIATED SUBDIVISION PROCESS. The public hearing was called to order. There was no attendance by the public. Michael Leek, Associate Plarmcr, presented the information from the report dated February 26, 1996. Comments from Commissioners: Loftus: · Supportive. Vonhof.' · Leek explained there would arguably be a downside from the standpoint from a developer because now it is not possible to do a subdivision process that circumvents one public hearing. Wuellner: · Supportive. Criego: · Agrees with staff recommendation. MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL REPEAL SECTION 6-3-1 OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE. Vote taken signified ayes by Vonhof, Wuellner, Creigo and Loftus. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY WUELLNER, TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Wuellner, Vonhof and Criego. MOTION CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS: 1995 Variance Summary Report. Associate Planner Michael Leek reviewed the 1995 variance activity. Comments by Commissioners: Loftus: · Status of the Clarke variance denial. MN022696 DOC PAGEI 0 Vonhof: · Interested on how many variances were in the shoreland district. Look into further study to an ordinance change. What recommendations can the Planning Cormnission make to City Council. Leek explained the approach w,9uld be to set up separate zoning districts. Wuellner: · Agrees. Criego: · The 50' setback reduction the from 75' setback doesn't hurt land owners. But has concern for a property owner if his neighbors obtain a setback restricting his fixture expansion. · Leek explained limits on side yard variances. · Rye said it would be proper for the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council to address this issue and staff will come up with some alternatives. MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY VONHOF TO ACCEPT THE REPORT, DIRECT THE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR INFORMATION AND DIRECT FURTHER STUDY OF POSSIBLE ORDINANCE REVISIONS. Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Vonhof, Criego and Wuellner. MOTION CARRIED. Announcement: Don Rye announced Deb Garross has resigned from her position and will be leaving the City in two weeks. Rye spoke on the joint meeting with City Council and the possible dates of April 15, and May 6. The Commission agreed on May 6, 1996. MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY VONHOF TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. Votes taken signified ayes by Loftus, Vonhof, Wuellner and Criego. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting adjourned at 10:32 p.m. Don Rye Director of Planning Connie Carlson Recording Secretary MNO22696.DOC PAGEI I