The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About9B - Low-To-Medium Density MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ~~ OCTOBER 2, 2000 9B JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR DONALD RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATING TO THE LOCATION CRITERIA FOR LAND DESIGNATED AS LOW AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL History: On March 6, 2000, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to consider the issue of the Low to Medium Density Residential land use classification in the Comprehensive Plan with the idea that the City Council would have the sole authority to determine whether a project should be built at the lower R-l density or the higher R-2 or R-3 density. The Commission considered this issue on June 12, 2000, and again on August 14, 2000. After considerable discussion, the Planning Commission concluded the text of the Comprehensive Plan should be amended to add language specifying the discretion of the City Council in these matters. When the Comprehensive Plan was updated in 1995, it was initially proposed there be three separate categories of residential land use in the Comprehensive Plan, namely Low, Medium and High Density Residential. This was the recommendation of the Planning Commission to the Council at that time. During the course of the Council's review, the Council decided to combine the Low and Medium categories into one. The rationale was that this would give the Council more control over the location of medium density (townhouse) projects. Current Circumstances: The current criterion in the Comprehensive Plan for locating zoning districts reads as follows: Determination of specific districts characteristic of this classification will be based upon consideration of several factors including but not limited to topography, geography, existing development and character J:\OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-023\00023cc.doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ... I Ir <' of the surrounding area, transportation system access and market conditions. This language is very general. While it provides little direction in determining the proper zoning district to be applied on a given piece of property, it does provide general criteria to consider in making those decisions. The staff originally suggested the text be amended to include a more specific set of criteria by adding the following language: In deciding whether an area should be zoned for Low or Medium density development, the above criterion should be applied so that areas zoned for Low-density development would generally be in areas of relatively flat topography, areas in proximity to existing low-density development and served primarily by local streets. Areas to be zoned for medium density development will typically be areas having more rolling topography, not in close proximity to existing low density development and having good access to collector and arterial streets. The City Council has the ultimate authority in making the determination of how this criterion is applied in any given situation. During its discussions, the Planning Commissioners noted they were comfortable with the existing language. However, in order to make it clear how this language would be applied to any specific application, the Commission suggested the following sentence be added to the existing language: The City Council has the ultimate authority in making the determination of how this criterion is applied in any given situation. Issues: The text of the Comprehensive Plan and the location of the land use designations are policy decisions. The proposed language does not add additional criteria nor does it specify when or how the given criteria should be applied. Rather, it spells out the fact the City Council has the ultimate decision making authority in these cases. Conclusion: The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendment. The City Attorney has reviewed the language. If the City Council is inclined to approve this amendment, the City Attorney recommends the matter be referred to the staff for the development of specific criteria the Council can apply in exercising its discretion in these matters. This item would then be placed on the November 6th agenda. ALTERNATIVES: The City Council has four alternatives: 1: \OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-023 \00023cc.doc Page 2 RECOMMENDED MOTION: REVIEWED BY: 1. Adopt a Resolution approving the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the R-L/MD designation as recommended by the Planning Commission. 2. Direct the staff to prepare a resolution including criteria the City Council can use in exercising their discretion when reviewing amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and return to the Council on November 6, 2000. 3. Direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings of fact denying the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the R-L/MD designation. 4. Continue the review for specific information or reasons per City Council discussion. Alternative #2. A motion and second to direct staff to prepare criteria the City Council may use in exercising their discretion for consideration on November 6,2000 is required. I :\OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-023\00023cc.doc Page 3 ~ tr' RESOLUTION DO-XX RESOLUTION APPROVING A PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND RELATING TO THE LOCATION CRITERIA FOR LAND DESIGNATED FOR LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES MOTION BY: SECOND BY: WHEREAS, on August 14, 2000, the City of Prior Lake Planning Commission initiated an amendment to the text of the City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan relating to the location criteria for land designated for Low to Medium Density Residential uses; and WHEREAS, legal notice of the public hearing was duly published and mailed in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and Prior Lake City Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on September 11, 2000, for those interested in this request to present their views; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2000, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the text of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan on the basis the text amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on October 2, 2000, the Prior Lake City Council considered the proposed amendment to the text of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and; WHEREAS, the City Council received the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment along with the staff reports and the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully considered the testimony, staff reports and other pertinent information contained in the record of decision of this case. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA, that: 1. The above recitations are herein fully incorporated as set forth above. 2. The following language (in bold italics) is hereby added to the text of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan as it relates to the location criteria for land to be designated for Low to Medium Density Residential uses: Determination of specific districts characteristic of this classification will be based upon consideration of several factors including but not limited to topography, geography, existing development and character of the surrounding area, transportation system access and market conditions. The City Council has the ultimate authority in making the determination of how this criterion is applied in any given situation. 1:\OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-023\rsOOxxcc.doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ....~._--_._.--r. t 3. Approval of this amendment is subject to the approval of the Metropolitan Council. Passed and adopted this 2nd day of October, 2000. YES NO Mader Mader Ericson Ericson Gundlach Gundlach Petersen Petersen Zieska Zieska {Seal} Frank Boyles, City Manager City of Prior Lake 1:\OOfiles\OOcompam\OO-023\rsOOxxcc.doc Page 2 Planning Commission Minutes August/5. 2000 . Concerned with the incentive wording. Kansier explained the difference between incentives d modifications. It is discretionary, based on findings. The City Council has the sole cretion to make the decisions. B ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND CITY OO-XX AMENDING SECTION 1103 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE. , AMEND SECTION 1106A.600 - 5TH LINE OF THE PARAGRAPH - ELIM ATE E WORD "ONLY" AND ADD THE WORD "SIGNIFICANTLY" SO E SENTE CE SHOULD READ "ANY MODIFICATIONS SHALL BE CONSIST T WITH THE OALS AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIV LAN AND SHALL APPROVED UPON A FINDING THAT THE MODIFIC ON DOES NOT SIGNIF ANTL Y ADVERSELY AFFECT SURROUND G PROPERTIES. V onhof: . The overlay district an important tool. . Supported staffs reco indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. ~ 5. Old Business: A. Continue discussion on Comprehensive Plan (Low to Medium Density). Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated August 14,2000, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. On March 6, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to consider the issue of the Low to Medium density land use classification in the Comprehensive Plan with the idea that the City Council would have the sole authority to determine whether a project could be built at the lower R-1 density or the higher R-2 or R-3 density. The Commission considered this issue on June 12,2000 and after discussion, deferred action on the request and asked staff to provide it with further input. Staff recommended approving the draft language and to direct staffto set a public hearing date to consider the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Open discussion: Criego: . Questioned why this issue came about? Kansier gave an example of a past development. . Not sure the new paragraph is effective. . Did not see a need for change. 1:\OOfiles\OOp1comm\OOpcmin\mn081400.doc 7 .,. II Planning Commission Minutes August 15. 2000 . The current paragraph gives the City as much control as it wants. Stamson: . Agreed with Criego. The current wording gives the flexibility. The strength in the original wording is better. The Commissioners did not have a problem. V onhof: . Concurred with Commissioners. . The Commissioners looked at these issues under the Comprehensive Plan and do more interpretation compared to the Council. . The Council would like specific direction. . From the Commissioners' perspective this is more limiting. Stamson: . The proposed language makes it easier, but not for better decisions. . The end results have been good. Why change it? Criego: . The new paragraph does not give any direction. It should be one way or the other. V onhof: . A compromise is to add the last sentence of the new paragraph to the old language. Stamson: . The existing language is working well. . Add the last sentence of the new language to the existing paragraph. The Council has the ultimate decision anyway. MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO INITIATE AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSNE PLAN TO ADD "THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY IN MAKING THE DETERMINATION OF HOW THIS CRITERION IS APPLIED IN ANY GIVEN SITUATION" TO THE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION CRITERIA FOR URBAN LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. New~n~sr ;< Annotcements~ Correspondence: 6. 7. 1 :\OOfiles\OOp1comm\OOpcmin\mn081400.doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes September 11,2000 . Agreed with the plan. Atwood: . Agree ith Commissioners, sees no problem with the plat. V onhof: . Concurred with with. andscaping requirements are complied MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECO OF THE PRELIMINARY PL THE REPORT WITH THE BE REMOVED. This matt will go to the City Council on October 2, ~ B. Case File #00-023 Consider an amendment to the text ofthe City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan relating to the location criteria for property to be designated as low to medium density residential. Planning Coordinator J ane ~ansieq)r.esented the Planning Report dated September 11, 2000, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. . . On March 6, 2000, the CitY COuncirdir~<?ted the Planning Commission to consider the j" -- , .. " ',' issue ofthe Low to Medium Density Residential land use classification in the Comprehensive Plan with the idea the City Council would have the sole authority to determine whether a project should be built at the lower R-l density or the higher R-2 or R-3 density. The Commission considered this issue on June 12,2000, and again on August 14,2000. After considerable discussion, the Planning Commission concluded the text of the, Comprehensive Plan should be amended to add language specifying the discretion cifthe City Council in these matters. The Planning Commission then initiated this amendment,and directed staff to schedule a public hearing. During its discus~i()ns, the Planning Commissioners noted they were comfortable with the existing language. However, in order to make it clear how this language would be applied to any specific application, the Commission suggested the following sentence be added to the existing language: "The City Council has the ultimate authority in making the determination of how this criterion is applied in any given situation." Staff recommended approval of the proposed amendment. There were no comments from the public. 1:\OOfiles\OOplcomm\OOpcmin\nm0911 DO.doc 3 T 'II' Planning Commission Minutes September 11.2000 Comments from the Commissioners: Stamson: . This is exactly what was discussed at the last meeting. Atwood, Criego and V onhof: . Agreed. MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMENDGITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. C. Ca File #00-064 Consider an amendment to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comp hensive Plan for the property located at 568./8<<15690 Credit River Road, the site f Prior Lake Baptist Church. . ;. Planning Coordina Jane Kansier presentedthePI~~ng Report dated Septernber 11, 2000, on file in the 0 co of the City PlanniiI:, D7~1!' On August 14,2000, the riorLake PlanningCC:)nllnission ~onsidered an application for a Zone Change for the prope ~located at 5680~d 5690 Credit River Road. The request was to rezone the property fi m the 1-1 (Generallndustrial) District to the R-l (Low Density Residential) District. . he Planning Comniission recommended approval of the proposed rezoning. At the same ime, the Commissioners initiated an amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land . e PI~nto designate this property for Low to Medium Density Residential uses. \ This property is d:Sigl1aled for PI~~'lndUStriat uses on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land:Use Map. The existing ~se is inco~stent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use designati()p.. '\ / i There were no comments.: from the public. " ~/ ,I Comments fromthe::Commissioners: /,/ Atwood: . No conrinent. , !/ Criego, Simson and V onhof: . Igreed with the recommended change. . It reflects what was discussed at the previous meeting. 1:\OOfiles\OOp1comrn\OOpcmin\mn091100.doc 4