Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07 30 2012 PC meeting minutes PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, July 30, 2012 1. Call to Order: Chairman Phelan called the July 30, 2012 Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners, Blahnik, Phelan, Hite, and Spieler, Planner Jeff Matzke, Community and Economic Development Director Dan Rogness, Engineer Seng Thongvanh and Community Development Assistant Peter Aldritt. 2. Approval of Agenda: MOTION BY PHELAN, SECONDED BY HITE TO APPROVE THE JULY 30, 2012 MEETING AGENDA AS PRESENTED. VOTE: Ayes, Spieler, Hite, Phelan and Blahnik. The Motion carried. 3. Consider Approval of July 16, 2012 Meeting Minutes: MOTION BY BLHANIK, SECONDED BY HITE TO APPROVE THE JULY 16, 2012 MEETING MINUTES. VOTE: Ayes, Hite, Blahnik, Phelan, and Spieler. The Motion carried. 4. Public Hearings: A. # EP 12-120 ANNEXATION AREA REZONING. The City of Prior Lake is initiating a process to change the zoning designation of approximately 28 acres of property from R-1 (Low Density Residential) to A (Agricultural) on the City of Prior Lake Zoning Map. This property was recently annexed into The City of Prior Lake and is located northeast of the intersection of CSAH 12 and CSAH 17. Director Rogness stated that on June 18, the City Council initiated a rezoning process for three parcels that were recently annexed into the City of Prior Lake. They are located near the northeast th portion of two intersecting county highways, #12 (170 Street E.) and #17 (Marschall Road). Land uses within these parcels include rural low-density residential and an agricultural business (Sailer’s Greenhouse). Upon annexation, all property is automatically zoned R-1,and it was decided that some property may need to be rezoned. Staff recommended that the City Council consider initiating a rezoning process for three parcels in Sub-Area 6.2 to an Agricultural Zoning District. Each parcel is nearly ten acres, and two are in Green Acres status. All three include Parcel IDs 119050190 (8.82 acres), 119050192 (8.96 acres) and 119050195 (9.91 acres). Two of these parcels are related to Sailer’s Greenhouse, which is a permitted use in the Agricultural Zone. MOTION BY SPIELER SECOND BY BLAHNIK TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:12 PM. VOTE: Ayes, Hite, Blahnik, Phelan, and Spieler. The Motion carried. No Public Comment MOTION BY BLAHNIK SECOND BY PHELAN TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:13 PM. VOTE: Ayes, Hite, Blahnik, Phelan, and Spieler. The Motion carried. 1 Commissioner Questions and Comments: Spieler asked if there is a benefit to go either Agricultural or Residential? Director Rogness responded that at this time, there isn’t one zone that is necessarily better than the other. Since the property is currently an agriculture use, staff felt that it made sense to zone it Agricultural. Hite asked whether we know how many properties are serviced by septic and well in this proposed rezoning area? Director responded there is a well and septic for the Peterson property, but there is only a well on Sailer’s property. Blahnik asked if Peterson were to sell the property, could a new owner bring in different farm animals? Director Rogness responded that only those animals existing at the time that the annexation occurred are allowed to continue. Phelan stated that he will be supporting this rezoning since it makes sense to have it agriculture due to some animals being there surrounded by agriculture land. It is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Spieler statedthat he will be supporting this proposal based on feedback tonight from staff. And, with the current uses that are in place today, it makes sense to have it be zoned for agriculture. Hite stated that she will be supporting this as well. She believes that the existing uses for these properties are consistent with the Agricultural Zoning District, which is also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Blahnik stated that he will be supporting this; common sense dictates that this area has more agriculture land uses. MOTION BY PHELAN SECOND BY SPIELER TO APPROVE A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO AGRICULTURAL, INCLUDING ALL THREE PARCELS. VOTE: Ayes, Roszak, Hite, Blahnik, and Spieler. The Motion carried B. #EP 12-121 JEFFERS POND 6TH ADDITION. Ryland Homes has submitted an application for a Major Amendment to the Jeffers Pond Planned Unit Development and a Preliminary Plat known as Jeffers Pond 6th Addition. Planner Matzke stated that Ryland Homes has applied for approval of a major amendment to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) known as Jeffers Pond and approval of a Preliminary Plat to be known as Jeffers Pond 6th Addition. The area of consideration for the major PUD Amendment and Preliminary Plat applies to Jeffers Pond section known as The Hollow. The site is located on the north side of Wilds Ridge, east of McKenna Road, and ½ mile west of CSAH 21. The current proposal calls for a redesign of five of the remaining 15 single-family detached home lots yet to be constructed within Jeffers Pond 2nd Addition (The Hollow of Jeffers Waterfront). 2 Applicant Michael Ramme with Ryland Homes 7599 Anagram Dive Eden Prairie, MN presented a brief history of the Ryland Company and their history in Prior Lake. Pending approval, Ryland plans to start building as soon as possible. They won’t be constructed a model unit, but rather, Ryland will use the model located in The Pointe. Ryland’s homes will have a few different design options, which will all have three car garages. Their unit layouts on the existing lots will require some adjustments, including the combination of some lots resulting in the loss of two lots, and some adjustments to backyard setbacks from the wetland area. Hite asked why the proposed building location on Lot 4 is close to the other existing home? Applicant Ramme responded that he believes it is due to the wetland buffer setback that is required on the other side of that lot. Blahnik asked why Ryland is re-platting five of these lots? Applicant Ramme responded that their current building design does not fit with how some of the lots are currently platted. Spieler noted that Ryland is proposing to combine two lots, and asked about pricing of a larger lot? Applicant Ramme responded that it is a larger corner lot, but it really depends on the market in terms of how it will be priced. MOTION BY PHELAN SECOND BY HITE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:44 PM. VOTE: Ayes, Hite, Blahnik, Phelan and Spieler. The Motion carried. Bob Nordine, 3890 Trail Pt Ct. stated that he is concerned about the design of the homes with his desire that they match the rest of the homes in the neighborhood. The association wants it to look like a finished community. He would also like to see the private street become a public street. The closeness of housing units on Lots 3 and 4 is another concern. Angela Heikes, 15017 Jeffers Pass stated that she is new to the area and was first attracted to the Planned Unit Development because it ensured the consistency of the neighborhood while allowing great amenities. When they built there, she said they followed strict requirements as far as setbacks height restrictions and architecture standards. She does not understand why this builder is allowed to change the requirements to fit their needs. Sandra Palteg, 15430 Jeffers Pass stated that she would also like to see Ryland present a design that matches the neighborhood, blending more in with the existing houses. Gary Branch, 2591 Waterfall Way stated his observation about the PUD being a very vital part of city development, and he thinks it is important to keep the integrity of the PUD. There is a lot of careful and good planning that goes into these planned developments. Craig Jensen, 14922 Jeffers Pass stated that he believes it is important to keep the architecture standards intact in order to ensure Ryland builds a good product. He does not live in the association, but he still wants to see homes that match the neighborhood. MOTION BY PHELAN SECOND BY SPIELER TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING at 6:57 PM. VOTE: Ayes, Hite, Blahnik, Phelan and Spieler. The Motion carried. Commissioner Questions: 3 Spieler asked whether there are city architecture standards for residential homes like those for commercial buildings? Planner Matzke responded there are not specific architecture standards for residential homes. Architecture standards are typically in the covenants of a homeowner’s association. Hite statedit would help her immensely if the covenants was at the meeting to review in order to compare it to what Ryland is proposing. She is hopeful that Ryland will respect the covenants and match them. Phelan asked what is legally binding when it comes to covenants and bylaws? And, he asked what the difference is between a public and private street. What would it take to become a public street? Planner Matzke responded that homeowner covenants are usually a recorded legal document with the county, which legally binds these property owners. The City is not a party to covenants, nor does the city enforce them. It is up to the individual homeowners to enforce them. Architectural standards are found in association covenants, and they can specifically control how the homes will look. Engineer Thongvanh responded to the street question. This street was probably not built to a public standard. The width would meet city standards but the cul-de-sac, and the end would be too tight for city maintenance equipment to maneuver. Phelan asked whether future amendments could take place to make this a public street? Planner Matzke identified a city process whereby the homeowners could petition to change the street from private to public subject to engineering department analysis.Staff indicated that it is doubtful it would gain support to be a public street. Phelan asked whether there are other areas like this with private streets? Engineer Thongvanh responded that there are other areas similar to this, but not that many. Planner Matzke responded in the Jeffers Pond Development, there is another private cul-de-sac. Phelan asked whether Central Bank mentioned an amount for its financial commitment to help upgrade the city storm water facilities? Planner Matzke responded the exact amount would be approved at final plat stage. The preliminary estimate to do those improvements is around $50,000. Central Bank said they would pay a third of the cost up to $17,000. Phelan asked about Ryland’s standpoint on the architecture standards in compliance with the other homes in the neighborhood. He is sympathetic to the homeowners if there will be drastic changes impacting aesthetics and financial aspects. Applicant Ramme responded that he does have a copy of the covenants here. As it pertains to architecture review, the developer is currently the declarant, which is Central Bank. The declarant or developer is the governing body that has the power to approve all exterior designs and elevations until the development is built out to a 75 percent. Then it is turned over to the current homeowners. At this time, Central Bank has approved the unit designs being proposed by Ryland Homes. 4 Spieler asked what percent is built at this time? Applicant Ramme responded that 35 percentof the development is currently built. As in Ryland’s other communities in the area, they will apply a monotony clause stating that there cannot be the same color same, design and elevations right next to each other. Ryland feels their product will match the neighborhood quality, while adding a different character without significant change. Blahnik asked whether Ryland was involved at the time with the original plat? Applicant Ramme responded no. Commissioner Comments: Spieler summarized that 8 homes are finished and another 16 will be built in The Hollow. He wants to ensure that the new homes fit the neighborhood and match the design. He would like to see the association and Ryland meet again to discuss design issues. Hite stated that she is torn about the design issues discussed tonight, but that the issue at the end of the day is the amendment to the PUD. Ryland has come here to build out the development, which is a positive sign to see homes being built there once again. The covenant issue that has come up is a private matter, and the commission is here to look at the approval of the PUD amendment. Blahnik stated this is a difficult issue, seeing that existing residents prefer to see a similar design that fits the community. He believes or hopes that Ryland will build a home that will fit the general style because they want to build homes that sell to homebuyers. He will be recommending approval of the proposed amendment. Phelan responded that he will echo his fellow commissioners by confirming his sensitivity to the neighbors. However, since the covenant control by residents is under the 75 percent mark, and the power is given to the owner for the architecture review, he would encourage Ryland and Central Bank to work closely with the neighbors. He will be supporting the Preliminary Plat and PUD Amendment. A MOTION BY BLAHNIK SECOND BY PHELAN TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PUD AMENDMENT SUBJECT TO THE LISTED CONDITONS BY STAFF. VOTE: Ayes, Hite, Blahnik, Phelan and Spieler. The Motion carried. A MOTION BY HITE SECOND BY BLAHNIK TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY TH PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS JEFFERS POND 6 ADDITION. VOTE: Ayes, Hite, Blahnik, Phelan and Spieler. The Motion carried. 5. Old Business: None 6. New Business: None 7. Announcements and Correspondence: A. Recent City Council Discussions/Decisions. Director Rogness presented two items from the rd July 23 council meeting related to the Fountain Hills CIC Plat and the plat for Berggren Beach. 5 8. Adjournment: MOTION BY PHELAN SECONDED BY HITE TO ADJORN THE MEETING. VOTE: Ayes, Hite, Blahnik, Roszak, and Spieler. The Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 7:29 p.m. Peter Aldritt, Community Development Assistant 6