HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993 March Planning Commission Agenda Packets1993
"A0304"
REGULAR PLANNING
AGENDA
Thursday, March 4, 1993
7:30 p.m. Call Meeting to Order.
7:35 p.m. 1. Consider lot area variance application for
Randy Dement and Mike Lambert.
8:00 p.m. 2. Public Hearing to consider a variance and
preliminary plat application for Westbury
Ponds.
10:00 p.m. 3. Consider public hearings to amend the
Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances to add storm
water management regulations.
Other Business
a)
b)
C)
All times stated on the Planning Commission Agenda, with the
exception of Public Hearings, are approximate and may start a few
minutes earlier or later than the scheduled time.
4629 Dakota St. S.E.. Prbr lake Minnesota 55372 J Ph (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL. oPPOKrU16N EMPLOM
pR,
U X
Atr �'N ESD/
"VAOIPC"
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
SITE ADDRESS:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
PLANNING REPORT
1
LOT AREA VARIANCE
RANDY DEMENT, MIKE LAMBERT
16536 SPRING AVENUE
DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER
YES X NO
MARCH 4, 1993
HISTORY /BACKGROUND
The Planning Department received a variance application from
Randy Dement and Mike Lambert to consider a 2,804 minimum lot
area variance. The subject site is legally described as per
attached survey. The site consists of part of Lot 8, Green
Heights First Addition. Lot 8 was divided into four parcels and
recorded with Scott County on December 22, 1970. As such, the
subject site and adjacent three parcels are considered lots of
record as per City Code Section 5 -4 -1 (C):
5 -4 -1 (C):
"A Lot of Record existing on May 7, 1973 (the effective date
of this original Zoning Ordinance) may be used for the
erection of a structure conforming to the use regulations of
the zoning district in which is is located, (Ord. 81 -10). A
lot of record located within the S -D Shoreland District is
buildable subject to the requirements of subsection 5- 8 -3(B).
(Ord. 91 -12, 11- 4 -91)."
The variance application is filed under City Code Section
5 - 8 - 3(B,i,c) which specifies that all substandard non water
frontage lots are buildable, provided that the minimum lot area
is equal to or greater than 10,000 square feet. The subject site
contains 7,196 square feet. The request is to approve a 2,804
square foot minimum lot area variance in order to construct a new
single family home on the parcel.
PREVIOUS PROPOSALS:
There are no previous proposals on file for the subject site.
PHYSIOGRAPHY:
T e lot con ains considerable relief and is wooded. This lot is
one of the few remaining vacant lots located along Spring Avemae.
ADJACENT USES:
The adjacent properties are developed with single family homes.
4629 Dakota St SE., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph (612) 4474230 / Fax(612)4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORPUNRY EMPLOYER
The northwesterly part of Lot 8, located contiguous to the rear
property line of the subject site is vacant and has no frontage
on a public street. Upon construction of the subject site, it
would appear that the adjacent parcel will be land locked and
therefore, difficult to develop. It is the understanding of
staff that the applicant does not own the adjacent vacant parcel.
The status of the vacant parcel is not an issue for this
particular application. However, it should be noted for the
record that absent an easement connecting to Spring, Dunkirk or
Green Heights Trail, access will not exist for the adjacent
vacant parcel.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the 2,804 square foot minimum lot area variance
as requested.
2. Continue the issue for specific reasons.
3. Deny the variance application based upon lack of
demonstrated hardship.
RECOMMENDATION:
The recommen ation from staff is to approve the 2,804 square foot
minimum lot area variance as requested. The applicant has
indicated that anticipated construction will conform to all
required setbacks. Based upon the drawing submitted lot coverage
would be approximately 14% with impervious surface of
approximately 20 %.
The hardship in this case is that the site is a lot of record,
subdivided and recorded prior to annexation into the city limits
of Prior Lake. Precedent exists in this neighborhood for
granting up to a 5,000 square foot minimum lot area variance.
The subject site would not be buildable without grant of the
requested variance which would result in substantial hardship to
the property. The hardship is not the result of persons
presently having interest in the property nor the City of Prior
Lake, but rather is the result of subdivision practices of a
former government agency. The variance observes the spirit and
intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
H4 R 22
SUSKISSION
(A)Canpl.eted application form. (B)Filing fee. (C)Property Survey indicating the
proposed development in relation to property lines and/or ordinary -high- water mark;
proposed building elevations and drainage plan. (D)Certified from abstract firm,
names and addresses of property owners within 100 feet of the exterior boundaries of
the subject property. (S)Canplete legal description i Property Identification Maher
(PID). (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if applicable. (QA
at 1 -50 showing: The site development plan, buildings: parking, loading,
access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility service.
ONLY CMPLETE APPLICATIONS 399L BE AOCEPfED AND REVIEW BY THE PLANNING OMMISSION.
To the best of my knowledge the information presented on this form is correct. In
addition, I have read Section 7.6 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance which specifies
requirements for variance procedures. I agree to prov information and follow the
procedures as outlined in the Ordinance. n n (\ 'M -'J,e7 , i
Submitted this 4day of
THIS SPACE IS TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE PIAb3I, DIRECTOR
- U •, • • •.• o-1 ,> Ual 1 - ,.� ar- •�
M N M •'�, it LJ 1 +• .` ,.' :IJ -'t
CONDITIONS-
Signature of the Planning Director
Date
vkq3 -01_
CITY OF PRIOR L•a�
PID#
APHTI'%"TON FOR VARIANCE
Applicant: lkf Lf//%Bf.PT
Bane Phone: 4 - fir3 2
Address: Gy? aesoac, AV, :& ="
iasMb Phase•
Property Owner: e /�/ - ye, oeFA
Address: 3S�s dtry„J
Bane Phone:
i/rs revit Tc/
iPt Work Phone:
Type of Ownership: Fee Contract
Purchase Agreement
Consultant/Contractor: llAst.QfirJ /zvee'
Phone: Yf - GS/si
.�f'CC� COiUST�UGy /d
�A6y°K G fa - a &J�'
Existing Use
of Property: ✓_
Present Zoning:
Legal Description
V.
of Variance Site:
Variance Requested: lla/ar'•e rizi° Gas vAiPi,R[
/le
Has the applicant previously sought to plat, rezone,
obtain a variance or conditional
use permit on the subject site or any part of it?
Yes y ND
What was requested:
When: Disposition:
Describe the type of improvements pr �OO� .son
A7- rA/fiLY
d,rN fu:.�arvDrt GAEL C
SUSKISSION
(A)Canpl.eted application form. (B)Filing fee. (C)Property Survey indicating the
proposed development in relation to property lines and/or ordinary -high- water mark;
proposed building elevations and drainage plan. (D)Certified from abstract firm,
names and addresses of property owners within 100 feet of the exterior boundaries of
the subject property. (S)Canplete legal description i Property Identification Maher
(PID). (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if applicable. (QA
at 1 -50 showing: The site development plan, buildings: parking, loading,
access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility service.
ONLY CMPLETE APPLICATIONS 399L BE AOCEPfED AND REVIEW BY THE PLANNING OMMISSION.
To the best of my knowledge the information presented on this form is correct. In
addition, I have read Section 7.6 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance which specifies
requirements for variance procedures. I agree to prov information and follow the
procedures as outlined in the Ordinance. n n (\ 'M -'J,e7 , i
Submitted this 4day of
THIS SPACE IS TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE PIAb3I, DIRECTOR
- U •, • • •.• o-1 ,> Ual 1 - ,.� ar- •�
M N M •'�, it LJ 1 +• .` ,.' :IJ -'t
CONDITIONS-
Signature of the Planning Director
Date
^EY FREPAREO FOR: VOIAQy
e BETTY 5CMERER SLAVE 00-0
GREEN HEIGHTS 7RAA. FRANNLW 7
V LAKE. M9. 69778 Q...r ....�
�
K..
kx.
7
1
E
p
C
t ftL 7 RtI 1110 R catinun or Irma 0. t6b9
Let M. @ven weight. beet Nii4N. OCIt W eeeteeli 79
feet thtrsf. me .tee tACYt W tm 3e !o tee WnK.
W� W M W pet Waw[ a ft" W at teeeN L W
AetLtee of ONb. Reef femwt7. Otenewu.
I�
WALE of FH[t
tomes Nan n NI
WOW hen msy.w/ Real.
J
I hMN7 age 11, mm Nm Me"
N AMttt7
t M1% LW A�Ew
wtir b Me tt M Sam N
ae X
1.
K..
kx.
7
1
E
p
C
t ftL 7 RtI 1110 R catinun or Irma 0. t6b9
Let M. @ven weight. beet Nii4N. OCIt W eeeteeli 79
feet thtrsf. me .tee tACYt W tm 3e !o tee WnK.
W� W M W pet Waw[ a ft" W at teeeN L W
AetLtee of ONb. Reef femwt7. Otenewu.
I�
WALE of FH[t
tomes Nan n NI
WOW hen msy.w/ Real.
J
I hMN7 age 11, mm Nm Me"
N AMttt7
t M1% LW A�Ew
wtir b Me tt M Sam N
�ae\ 06
1p
.y®\ tot ®'fl`
0
,r
r
:z
� \.
� a
A
IL
o o - r9j. 3 ti
,b
0 ioA ZIN
p' ti hN
A,
34JI r
+{ tt �o
,r
°r
C
ti
�9
\o Otc
'• \\ _� NOD.
�'
�
`
old
p£'o � 9
� p � G VI�r'� HT�C �•r 6�
1 � M. ✓KT h'�cb� 9r •i
7CP cF P�.ct� 9i0
M� C
A c
,e
• i�� 7
i- �* PROPOSEP PrAin < .��
t
r
I
�
I
n
f
> -
r
P
I
x =
LI s ��S
i row
o 8A
y n y
8
N
,.
1`
/, 11 //
.,.
x =
_
O �
I
oz
�
r
/, 11 //
.,.
"VA01PN"
NOTICE OF HEARING
FOR
LOT AREA VARIANCE
You are hereby notified that a hearing will be held by the
Planning Commission in the Prior Lake Council Chambers at 4629
Dakota Street S.E. on:
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, -1993 at - 7:35 P.M.
PURPOSE OF HEARING:
SUBJECT SITE LOCATION
REQUESTED ACTION:
If you desire to be hei
attend this meeting. I
by the Planning Con
Prior Lake PlanningbDel
Prior Lake Planning 'C
DATE MAILED: February
4629 Dakota St. S.E„ Prior L
g MWmesota 55372 / Ph. (612):;
AN EQUAL OPPORrUN TY BO YER :
Bights 1st
�i construct
)me on the
r attached
ce Zoning
3 that the
)n lakeshore
R =1 Urban
11 ;
"CU9304"
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: 2
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING — WESTBURY PONDS PRELIMINARY
PLAT AND VARIANCE REQUEST
APPLICANT: WESTBURY DEVELOPMENT CORP., SAVAGE, MINNESOTA
PRESENTER: JAMES HAYES, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
PUBLIC HEARING: X YES NO
DATE: MARCH 4, 1993
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the public hearing is to consider two distinct
applications: Preliminary plat consideration of Westbury Ponds;
and variance applications to allow increased block lengths of
three blocks wit in the subject site. The two applications are
being considered contemporaneously because of the
interrelationship of the subdivision to the development proposal.
However, it is necessary to distinguish between the applications
in the review process since the subdivision and variance process
are separate issues. A separate motion in the form of a
recommendation to the City Council, w'.11 be required. Each motion
should be supported by findings of fact, performance criteria and
hardship findings relevant to the specific application.
The attached agenda packet contains the application for
subdivision and variance application along with a written
proposal prepared by the developer, supporting maps and data. The
applications are followed by a packet containing memorandums from
City staff and other affected agencies received as of March 1,
1993. Finally, the public hearing notices and maps published in
the Prior Lake American and mailed to approximately 200
residents, business owners, utility companies and affected
agencies.
SUBDIVISION REVIEW:
The preliminary plat of Westbury Ponds is being processed as a
standard subdivision with the procedures and requirements
outlined in Section 6 -3 -2 of Subdivision Ordinance 87 -10. The
subject site consists of approximately 60 acres bounded on the
south by S.T.H. 13 and the existing and proposed plats of West
Edge Estates (a Townhouse Project), on the east and northeast by
Five Hawks Avenue and Five Hawks Elementary School, on the north
by Pershing Avenue and the older plat of Spring Brook Park and
on the west by the plat of Willows Sixth Addition. See Exhibit A
for the subject site area location map.
4629 Dakota St. SE., Prbr Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORPUbM EAIKOM
comprehensive plan for Westbury Ponds from medium density to low
density residential and that the zoning map should be amended to
reflect a rezoning of the site from R -3, Multi- family
Residential and B -3, General Business to R -1, Single- family
Residential. The City Council subsequently approved the Planning
commission recommendation for these amendments on September 8,
1992. Thus, the development of Westbury Ponds is consistent with
the comprehensive plan of the City of Prior Lake.
Grading & Utility Plan
See memo from Larry Anderson dated March 1, 1993 for details.
Predevelopment stormwater runoff flows northerly into the ponds
and northeasterly via the northeasterly pond into a creek and
then into Prior Lake. A large amount of stormwater flows onto the
southwest corner of the site and into the smaller northwesterly
ponding area. This runoff has caused some severe erosion problems
along the westerly boundary of the property. Preliminary review
of the site indicates that on site ponding of surface water
runoff to maintain water quality will be necessary for the
requested improvements. All storm sewer easements needed for the
site will be provided with the final plat submittal after the
final plans are approved by staff.
The drainage problem which exists in the area abutting this plat
will be corrected by filling in the hole created by the previous
developer. The hole is on lots 2 - 5, Block 1, Westbury Ponds
First Addition. The storm water will be routed through a
proposed pipe in Willowwood Street and Dunkirk Avenue. The hole
on Lots 2 - 5, Block 1, will be filled and the drainage problem
corrected.
There are, some steep slopes along the north and west sides of the
property between the pond areas and the area being proposed for
development. These areas will be protected with silt fencing and
by seeding the disturbed areas as soon as possible after site
grading is completed. As required by City Ordinance, proper
erosion control and runoff containment will be maintained during
construction of the houses. Upon completion of the building
construction and utility hookup all disturbed areas will be
dressed off and covered with sod.
Park Dedication:
The park declication requirement for Westbury Ponds will be an
area of 2.78 acres on the northeast edge of the site abutting the
Five Hawks School property. It is understood that this area will
be available to residents as well as students during the daytime
hours. In addition, 15.9 acres will be deeded to the City as
Outlot A which contains wetlands and steep slope areas. This
park acreage may be exapnded in future plans during phase two of
the development.
General Discussion:
The propose su ivision can be considered an infill property in
Prior Lake and is restricted on all sides by adjacent
The bulk of the property has been under cultivation except the
pond areas to the north and northwest and the areas with
boxelder growth near the farm buildings and ravines The pond
areas are wooded with a mixture of tree types and sizes. There
are several areas that are becoming eroded because of story
water runoff from the south, the main problem is along the
westerly boundary with the Willows Sixth Tddition plat.
The 1?ropoual as presented is for preliminary plat approval to
subdivide the property into 97 single family lots in two phases.
Phase 1 as shown on the preliminary plat contains 42 lots. Phase
2 would contain the remaining 45 lots. The proposal will provide
for a sidewalk along the northerly side of Willowwood Street from
Willow Lane to Five Hawks Avenue and a six (6) foot earth berm
along the Highway 13 right -of -way with lilac and sumac cover on
top. Also as a part of the proposal the developer will dedicate
to the City the park area and deed the area contained in Outlot
A, on th° plat to the City.
The access to the site from Highway 13 will be via County Road
No. 12 and Willow Lane for phase one of the project. After
completion of phase two the property will access Highway 13 from
Five Hawks Avenue and the proposed Willowwood Street. This
intersection will eventually receive signal lights thereby
improving the safety of access for the Five Hawks School busses.
The proposed roadways will also allow an access to the west and
north for the school busses without entering Highway 13.
It is the intention of the developer to have custom built frame
houses with attached garages and a mixture of individual house
designs using earth tone color or wood exterior finish. The
house size and type will be similar to the houses constructed in
the Willows Sixth Addition. Sales are anticipated to be in the
$110,000 to $135,000 range.
Assessments
See memo from Ralph Teschner dated February 19, 1993 for details.
The subject site has been previously assessed for water and sewer
improvements under project 72 -7 in 1974. All past applicable
deferred assessment amounts have been called and distributed
against the land. The tax status of the property is in a current
state with no outstanding delinquencies. The subdivision is
subject to a unit assessment for Water and Sewer ($601.48/lot);
Street Overlay sum ($908.20); a Stormwater Management Fee
(16.8 cents/ S , ft.) and a Collector Street Fee of
($700.00 /acre). Total City fees required for the development of
the subdivision amount to $324,088.77, which will be collected
upon entering into a developer's agreement for the utility
improvements.
Com rehensive Plan:
T e
PT anning commission held a public hearing for the
comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning on August 6, 1992. The
Commission recommended approval of the amendment to the
residential, transportation, or natural areas. These site
restrictions require variances for three blocks within the site.
MnDOT has discouraged additional road access to T.H. 13 which
has compelled the developer to plat the parallel block #6 to
extend for 1415 feet, which requires a variance of 415 feet.
Block qi will also require.a variance of 371 feet because of the
constraints of the wetlands bordering the site on the north and
northwest. Finally, block q7 will also require a variance due
to the constraints of the school property and park dedication
which border the site on the north. This variance is only 30
feet but still must be addressed in this application.
The city is currently working with the school district and the
developer to dedicate additional land for school property. The
school district is attempting to find suitable land for an
additional school building. This may entail a joint powers
agreement in which there would be a land exchange between the
school district and the developer. All of this information will
be presented at subsequent meetings.
Alternatives:
1. F Find the preliminary plat of Westbury Ponds in compliance
with the Subdivision Ordinance contingent upon:
a) The sanitary sewer, watermain and street plans must be
subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
b) The stormwater management, storm sewer, grading, and
erosion control plans must be subject to the approval
of the City Engineer.
C) Appropriate drainage and utility easements be provided
acceptable to the City Engineer.
d) Additional recommendations in the memo from the City
Engineer.
2 Deny the plat based upon specific findings.
3. . Continue the hearing for specific purposes or lack of
information or detail.
You are hereby notified that the Planning Commission will hold a
public hearing in the Prior Lake City Council Chambers at 4629
Dakota Street S. E. on March 4, 1993 at
7:30_ p.m.
The purpose of the hearing is to consider the subdivision of the
following legally described property into _97_ single family
lots.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
That part of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 2,
Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota and that part of
the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3,
Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota and that part of
Government Lot 1, of said Section 3, described as follows:
Commencing at the southwest corner of said West Half of the
Southwest Quarter; thence northerly along the west line of said
West Half of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 990.50 feet;
thence easterly at right angles to said west line a distance of
150.78 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be
described; thence continuing easterly at right angles to said
west line a distance of 800.00 feet more or less to the west line
of the east 366.00 feet of said West Half of the Southwest
Quarter; thence southerly along said west line of the east 366.00
feet to the northerly right -of -way line of State Trunk Highway
No. 13; thence southwesterly along said northerly right -of -way
line to its intersection with the east line of the west 820.00
feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said
Section 3; thence northerly along said east line of the west
820.00 feet to the north line of the south 390.00 feet of said
Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence westerly along
said north line of the south 390.00 feet to the west line of said
Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter the same being the
east line of the plat of WILLOWS SIXTH ADDITION: thence
northerly, easterly and northerly along the east line of said
plat to its intersection with the south line of the flat of GREEN
HEIGHTS; thence easterly alone the south line of said plat of
GREEN HEIGHTS and the south line of the plat of GREEN HEIGHTS
FIRST ADDITION, to the west line of Lot 14, SPRING BROOK PARK
2ND ADDITION; thence southerly along said west line to the
southwest corner of said Lot 14; thence easterly along the south
line of Lots 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, and 5, of said plat
4629 Dakota St. SE, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORrUNTY EMPL M M
of SPRING BROOK PARK 2ND ADDITION to the southeast corner of
said Lot 5; thence northerly along the east line of said Lot 5,
to the northeast corner, the same being the northwest corner of
Outlot A, of said plat; thence easterly along the north line of
said Outlot A, t the northeast corner; thence southerly along
the east line of said Outlot A, the same being the west line of
Lot 4, of said plat to the southwest corner of said Lot 4; thence
easterly along the south line of said Lot 4, a distance of 30.00
feet; thence Partheasterly to a point distant 1090.00 feet
northerly (a measured parallel with the west line of said West
Half of the Southwest Quarter) from the point of beginning;
thence southerly along said parallel line a distance of 1090.00
feet to the point of beginning. (Containing 59,80 acres).
Or more commonly described as:
Approximately 59.80 acres bounded on the south by State Highway 13
and the existing and Qropsed plats of West Edge Estates, on the
east and northeast by Five Hawks Avenue and Five Hawks School, on
the north by Pershing Avenue and the older plat of Spring Brook
Park, on the west by the plat of Willows Sixth Addition plat.
If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should
attend this public hearing. The Planning Commission will accept
oral and or written comments. If you have questions regarding
this matter, contact the Prior Lake Planning Department at
447 -4230.
James A. Hayes
Associate Planner
City of Prior Lake
To be published in the Prior Lake American on February 22_
and _March 1 , 1993. _
C
"VA02PN"
NOTICE OF HEARING
FOR
VAR IANCE
You are hereby notified that a hearing will be held by the
Planning Commission in the Prior Lake Council Chambers at 4629
Dakota Street S.E. on:
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 1993 at 8:00 P.M.
PURPOSE OF HEARING: To consider a variance application
for Westbury Development Corporation
of 12433 Princeton Avenue, Savage,
MN 55378.
SUBJECT SITE LOCATION: Approximately 60 acres of vacant
land located north of S.T.H. 13,
west of Five Haw:ts Elementary
School, south of Pershing Street and
east of Willows Sixth Addition.
REQUESTED ACTION:
The applicant proposes to subdivide
the property into 97 single family
lots to be known as Westbury Ponds.
Subdivision ordinance 87 -10, Section
6 -6 -3 stipulates that Blocks shall
ordinarily not exceed one thousand
(1000) feet in length. The proposed
subdivision contains three blocks in
excess of 1,000 feet. The applicant
requests a variance from Section
6 -6 -3 to plat the p- operty as
proposed on the attached maps for
subdivision.
If you desire to be
heard in reference to this matter, you should
attend this meeting.
oral and written comments will be accepted
by the Planning Commission. For more information, contact the
Prior Lake Planning
Department at 447 -4230.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
DATE MAILED: February 23, 1993
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Cake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORruNrrY 84WAR
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
TO: HORST GRASER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
FROM: LARRY J. ANDERSON, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
SUBJECT: WESTBURY PONDS FIRST ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT
DATE: MARCH 1, 1993
The developer is requesting preliminary plat approval for
Westbury Ponds First Addition.
The subdivision is fairly straight forward and from an
engineering standpoint does not present difficult issues.
The subdivision abuts T.H. 13 and does not request additional
access to T.H. 13 nor should access be requested from a safety
standpoint on T.H. 13.
Access to the parcel will be from Five Hawks Avenue and
Willowwood Street. When the plat of Willows sixth Addition was
approved, an additional access was anticipated at Priorwood
Avenue.
At this point, it is not possible to extend Priorwood Lane as the
extension would be through a delineated wetland. At the time of
development of Willows Sixth Addition the developer excavated
this area for topsoil, which at the time all or part of the area
probably was not a wetland. The Wetland Conservation Act of
1991 now defines this excavated area as a wetland. The portion of
the wetland north of Priorwood Lane has had additional drainage
diverted to the area and as a result has an artificially high
water level. The area east of Priorwood Lane cannot be filled
without a wetland mitigation plan. Without wetland replacement,
Priorwood Lane cannot be extended.
The access from Willowwood Street and Five Hawks is acceptable.
Ultimately, CSAH 23 will relocated to align with Five Hawks
Avenue and a signal erected at the intersection of Five Hawks and
T.H. 13.
STORM WATER
When the Willows Sixth Addition was developed, a large amount of
storm water was discharged /diverted along the east property line.
4629 Dakota St. SE., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EAQnD M
The drainage comes from the car wash area and follows the east
property lines to the created wetland. The Willows Sixth
Addition developer excavated a large area adjacent to the lots
creating an erosion problem.
The drainage problem which exists in the area abutting this let
will be corrected by filling in the hole created by the previous
developer. The hole is on Lots 2 - 5, Block 1, Westbury Ponds
First Addition. The storm water will be routed through a
proposed pipe in Willowwood Street and Dunkirk Avenue. The hole
on Lots 2 - 5, Block 1, will be filled and the drainage problem
corrected.
The developer is proposing to excavate the wetland area south of
Friorwood Lane so that a permanent pool of water would exist with
wetland vegetation surrounding the water. The area as it exists
does not have any open water. At the time of writing this memo,
the detailed drawings for this excavation have not been
submitted; however, based upon discussions with the developer's
representatives this option appears to be an improvement for the
neighborhood. The area north of Priorwood Lane has an
artificially high water level due to increased drainage. A
control structure will be provided to maintain a lower water
level. The positive affect will be to save a very large ash tree
which appears to be in danger from flooding. A detailed plan for
this area needs to be provided with consistency to the Wetland
Conservation Act of 1991. In addition, storm wat— pre- treatment
is being provided adjacent to lots 5 & 6, Block 1. Pond size
according to the Best Management Act Practices needs to be
reviewed to determine its adequacy, if not a lot may need to be
eliminated to meet the Best Management Act Practices.
Staff has requested that a water control structure be constructed
between the two wetlands north of Lot 18, Block 1, to implement
the City's Stormwater Management Plan. The wetlands are DNR
protected and coordination will have to be made with the DNR and
the property owner adjacent to the pond on Pershing Avenue.
Implementation of this needs further detail by the developer and
City.
WATERMAIN & SANITARY SEWER
The existing system has adequate capacity to serve the
development.
Engineering staff recommends preliminary plat approval with the
following contingencies:
The recommendations in the memo be addressed.
Plans for sanitary sewer, watermain and street be
provided which are acceptable to the City Engineer which
are in conformance with the subdivision ordinance and
Engineering Guidelines Manual.
Stormwater management, storm sewer, grading, and erosion
control plans are provided acceptable to the City
Engineer and consistent with the City's Stormwater
Management Plan, Wetiand Conservation Act of 1991, and
the MPCA's Best Management Practices.
Appropriate drainage and utility easements be provided
acceptable to the City Engineer on the final plat.
�pv PR r
U '
tTJ
P /
NE5
To: Planning
From: Ralph Teschner
Finance Director
Re: WESTBURY PONDS
(assessment review)
Date: February 19, 1993
Westbury Ponds consists of two parcels (PIN/ 25 903 001 0 and
PIN@ 25 902 102 1) which have been previously assessed for water
and sewer improvements under Project 72 -7 in 1974. The area of
the preliminary plat comprises 59.80 acres which have been loot
assessed for trunk water and sewer acreage charges. All past
applicable deferred assessment amounts have been called and
distributed against the land. The tax status of the property is
in a current state with no outstanding delinquencies. The balance
of special assessments remaining are detailed as follows:
Legal Description
Parcel Number Code
25 903 001 0 18
72
Type Amount
42 acres
3- 114 -22
17.73 acres
2- 114 -22
S &W $40,251.95
Overlay 908.20
25 902 102 1 18 S &W $18,091.44
Based upon a preliminary lot count of 97, a unit assessment for
water and sewer would be $601.48 per lot. These assessments have
a remaining term of five (5) years. The street overlay sum of
$908.20 would be required to be paid since a unit distribution
would be less than $10.00 per parcel.
Assuming the initial net lot area of the plat does not change the
following storm water and collector acreage calculations would be
determined at time of entering into the developer's agreement for
the construction of utilities during the course of the two phases
of development.
STORM WATER FEE CALCULATION:
Net area of plat - 33.03 ac. @ 16.8 cents /sq.ft. = $241,716.18
COLLECTOR STREET ACREAGE CALCULATION:
33.03 ac. @ $700 /acre = $23,121.00
4629 Dakota St SE, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNrrY EMPLOYER
I have reviewed the attached proposed request in the following are--
ry} N
•
Y
f M f }
mote
` GRADING
_SIGNS _
— COUNTY ROAD ACCESS
—LEGAL ISSUES
_SEPTIC SYSTEM _
_ - A — ASSESSRENTS
OTHER
I reconmend:
X APPPOVAL DENIAL COMITIONAL APPHWAL
COMMENTS: GEc A=9, lrCrwli
I have reviewed the attached proposed request in the following areas-
a
a o
r�
I recommends
O
« C O DE
E •.•-�
NT
FL4M PLAIN
0
FEATU
y.•.iv:.. •.
R r. �..
GRADING
'.grcm
--X_ ROAD ACCESS _
LEGAL ISSUES _
SEPPIC SYSTEM _
ASSESSMMS _
0141ER
APPROVAL DENIAL _CONDITIONAL APPBOOL
R
0
4 CIAM1.. `' I
RECEIVE-r)
FE® 1 g 1993
I have reviewed the attached proposed request in the following areas: L%E
Nk R
-- EWER
�
— PAWO
ELDCPRIC
GAS
BM ODDE
48 a
_GMIM
—SIGNS
— OOONPY FM ACMW
_LAY, ISSUES
SEPPIC SYSTEM
ASSE.S94ENfS
OTAER
I reoomneed:
'V 1Y ••' 1 1 ) 40 0 (OR 1 . 1 OW4 •••
• r,
i/( r.
V STBDRT POUS FnW AM17ION
.• A AA l
Jr ll A, 1 A 1 ' ,.1Y,
WESTBURY DEVELOPMENT
C/O Mr. James Allen
12433 Princeton Avenue
Savage, Mo. 55378
Ph. (612) 890 -1888
VALLEY ENG INEERIN G CO., INC.
7301 Ohms Lane
Suits 500
Minneapolis, Mn. 55439
Steven Harvy PE
Ph. (612) 832 -9475
VALLEY SURVEYING CO., P.A.
16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL SE
SUITE 120-0
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
Telephone: 612 -447 -2570
SURVEYING AND PLANNING
Ronald A. Swanson, R.L.S.
WFSTRMy PONDS FIRST ADDITION
PAGE 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NARRATIVE
EXHIBITS
Property Legal Description
Property Zoning Classification
Property Location
Existing Site Conditions
Request for Subdivision
Site Data, Density, Areas etc.
Forestry Report
PAGE
2
3
3
3
3
4
Vehicular Access 4
Architectural Standards 4
Existing Storm Water Runoff
Steep Slopes and Erosion Control Measures
5
5
6-12
Prel iminary Plat
13
Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan
14
Pre liminary Sever and Water Plan
15
Preliminary Street Plan and Profiles
16-17
Existing Conditions and Forestry Inventory
18
Tree Planting Plan
19
WESTBURY PONDS FIRST ADDITION
Page 2
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
That part of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 2, Township 114,
Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota and that part of the Southeast Quarter of the
Southeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota
and that part of Government Lot 1, of said Section 3, described as follows.
Commencing at the southwest corner of said West
thence northerly along the west line of said West
a distance of 990.50 feet; thence easterly at ri
distance of 150.78 feet to the point of beginnin
thence continuing easterly at right angles to
800.00 feet more or less to the west line of the
Half of the Southwest Quarter; thence southerly
east 366.00 feet to the northerly right -of -way 1
the
Lots
2ND
8
of the Southwest Quarter;
of the Southwest Quarter
ngles to said west line a
the land to be described;
west line a distance of
Tzome aouu,eriy a 4ag 991a
lint of beginning.
WESTBURY PONDS FIRST ADDITION
Pass 3
PROPERTY ZONING CLASSIFICATION:
The property is presently zoned R -1 Single Family Residential and the
requested use for this project is also R -1 Single Family Residential.
PROPERTY LOCATION:
The property is bounded on the south by State Highway 13 and the existing and
proposed plats of West Edge Estates (a Townhouse Project), on the east and
northeast by Five Hawks Avenue and Five Hawks School, on the North by
Pershing Avenue and the older plat of Spring Brook Park, on the west by the
plat of Willows Sixth Addition.
R41 f44 L Y tot :
The bulk of the property has been under cultivation except the pond areas to
the north and northwest and the areas with boxelder growth near the farm
buildings and the ravines. The pond areas are wooded with a mixture of tree
types and sizes. There are several areas that are becoming eroded because of
storm water runoff from the south, the main problem is along the westerly
boundary with the Willows Sixth Addition plat.
Public sanitary sewer, water and electrical services are available to the
site at this time.
EXISTING STORK RATER RUNOFF:
Predevelopment stormwater runoff flows northerly into the ponds and
northeasterly via the northeasterly pond into a creek and then into Prior
Lake. A large amount of stormwater flown onto the southwest corner of the
site and into the smaller northwesterly ponding area. This runoff has caused
some sever erosion problem along the westerly boundary of the property.
Prel iminary review of the site indicates that on site ponding of surface
water runoff to maintain water quality will be necessary for the requested
improvements. All storm sewer easements needed for the site will be provided
with the final plat submital after the final plans are approved by staff.
WESTBURY PONDS FIRST ADDITION
Page
There are some steep slopes along the north and west sides of the property
between the pond areas and the area being proposed for developement. These
areas will be protected with silt fencing and by seeding the disturbed areas
as soon as. possible after the site grading is completed. As required by city
ordinance proper erosion control and runoff containment will be maintained
during construction of the houses. Upon completion of the building
construction and - utility hookup all disturbed areas will be dressed off and
covered with sod.
The access to the site from Highway 13, will be via County Road No. 12 and
Willow Lane for phase one of the project. After completion of phase two the
property will access highway 13, from Five Hawks Avenueand the proposed
Willowwood Street. This intersection will eventually receive signal lights
thereby improving the safety of access for the Five Hawks School Busses. the
proposed roadways will also allow an access to the west and north for the
school busses without entering highway 13.
iMJ w? J' My W1 .11.' 11
It is the intention of the developer to have custom built frame houses with
attached garages and a mixture of individual house designs using earth tone
color or wood exterior finish. The house size and types will be similar to the
houses constructed in the Willows Sixth Addition. Sales are anticipated to be
in the $110,000 to $135,000 range.
JiLm
The proposal as presented is for preliminary plat approval to subdivide the
property into 97 single family lots in two phases. Phase 1 as shown on the
pre liminary plat contains 42 lots. Phase 2 would contain the remaining 45
lots. The proposal will provide for a sidewalk along the northerly side of
Willowwood Street from Willow lane to Five Hawks Avenue and a 6 ft. earth berm
along the highway 13 right -of -way with lilac and sumac cover on top. This berm
should greatly reduce the traffic noise generated by highway 13.
Also as a part of the proposal the developer will dedicate to the City the
park area and deed the area contained in Outlot A, on the plat to the City. it
is understood that the City Park Department will construct the 8 ft. nature
trail shown on the plat.
GROSS AREA OF PLAT
OOTLOT A OF PUT
PROPOSED PARS AREA OF PLAT
AREA OF STREET R/Y IN PLAT
NET AREA OF PLAT
TOTAL PROPOSED LOT
MET DENSITY 97 /33.03
59.80 ACRES
15.90 ACRES
2.78 ACRES
8.09 ACRES
33.03 ACRES
97
2.94 DH AC.
PAGE 6
Introduction
This is an inventory of the forestry cover type for the preliminary plat of
Westbury ponds.
Considering the many different treed areas of the plant, 1 have separated out
certain areas for ease of explanation. They are as follows:
A. Isolated areas of Boxelder
B. Open, uncultivated areas
C. tow wet areas bordering the wetlands
D. Steep areas bordering the wetlands
E. Combination of wet and steep area near the wetlands
F. Small stand of Black Walnut
See Appendix A for a'tlst of forestry terms and scientific names
of trees mentioned in this report
A. Isolated Areas of Boxelder
• These are areas that have not been famed because they were too
steep to be tilled or bemuse it was part of the farmstead.
• Boxelder, a weak fast -growing use dominates these sites bemuse they
out - compete other species.
• These sites have been dumping grounds for old farm machinery.
• Most trees on these sites are old growth (30+ years). -
• Regeneration of Boxelder and Elm occur in thinner populations.
B. Open, Uncultivated Land
• Sumac and Elm are being established.
• Trees are small, generally about 2• caliper.
PAGE 7
C. Low Wet Areas Bordering the Wetlands
Area C1 has a few old- f±wwth larger remnants.
• A very large (estimate 6 dbh) Ash tree grows here. Possibly a record.
• A large Bur Oak (24 "+ dbh).
Regeneration consists of Boxelder, Elm, Green Ash, Hackbeny, Bur
Oak, and Red Oak.
• Regeneration is mostly Boxeiders with diameters of 410" dbh.
• Young tree population is average.
• There are a few scattered Willows and Cottonwoods in this site.
Area C2 consists mainly of Cottonwood and Willow
• Diameters range from 8-12" dbh.
• Regeneration is Boxelder.
• This area is wet most of the year.
• Populations are average to thin.
D. Steep Areas Bordering the Wetlands
Area D1 is predominantly 4-S dbh Ash trees.
• Population of young Ash trees is high.
• Small Red Oak and small Boxelders also grow here, but their population
is small.
Area D2 (along Pershing Avenue) consists of large, sparsely populated
Bur Oak. A large Basswood and Red Oak was also found.
• A thick population of Basswood and Oak (2 -6" dbh) are established.
PAGE 9
Area Q3 has Sugar Maple and Bur Oak.
• Trees are mature and population is light
• Mature trees are 16-20" dbh.
Regeneration is Sugar maple (under 2" caliper).
E. Combination of Wet and Steep Areas Around Wetland
• Predominate tree cover is 10-16" dbh Cottonwood.
• Swamp Willow established at wetland edge.
• New growth is Elm and Boxelder.
• Populations are average.
F. Stand of Walnut
• This stand exists within Area O
• A large Black Walnut (est. 20" dbh) is probably the seed source for
newly established trees.
14 t0 Black Walnut trees of 46" diameter are fond in this area.
.- The large Black Walnut is not a high value lumber or veneer tree. Most
of its value is for wildlife.
Conclusion
• The large high - quality trees that are found on all sites are very susceptible to
construction damage, either by filling over with soil, compaction from
equipment, or excavation.
• A minimum safe distance from these trees would be the drip line (the area
around the base of the tree that is determined by the outermost edge of the
branches).
• If drainage patterns change, soil and moisture conditions will change, thus
affecting the health and vigor of the trees.
FAGS 9
It is a good practice to keep desirable small trees because they can survive
construction and eventually replace the old trees when they die.
Most all trees on this site hav4 a small value for the lumber they can
produce, but their value is in the benefit they provide to the wildlife and
esthetics to the people.
PAGE
Appendix A
Forestry Terms
c. piper.
The diameter measured near the base of a tree, common in
nursery stock.
c- n:
The diameter at breast height — universal forestry term to
describe tree sizes.
drip line:
The boundary of the area of a tree defined where the water
would drip form the outermost branch tips.
UST OF TREE SPECIES
Common Name Sdentific Name
Ash, Green
°raxinus V ennsylvanda
Aspen
Populus tremuloides
Basswood
Tiliia americana
Boxelder
Acer negundo
Cherry, Black
Prunus serodne
Cottonwood
Populus deltoides
Elm
Ulmus species
Hackbery
Celds occidentalts
Hickory, Bittemut Caya cordifortnis
Locust, Black
Robina pseudoacada
Maple, Silver
Acer saccharinum
PAGE 11
Common Name
Scientific Name
Maple, Sugar
Acer saccharum
Oak, Bur
Quercus Macrocarpa
Oak, Red
Quercus rubra
Sumac
Rhus typhina
Walnut, Black
Juglans nigra
Willow
Salix species
PAGE 12
CREDENTIALS
James K. Spieker
14226 Ash Circle N.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Phone: 445 -8569
B.S. Forestry and Watershed Management, University of Minnesota
B.S. Agriculture Education, University of Minnesota
Lumberjack Tree Service, Owner /Operator
US. Forest Service, Technician
Scott County Soil and Water Conservation District, Technician
Johnson Logging, Timber Buyer
PLANTING E EWE `M
W my MDS
Cult Deineir • 3803 Green Heights Trail SW • Prior Lake, MN 55372 • (612)885 -4490 ext 232 (Day)
March 3, 1993
Prior Lake Planning Commission
4629 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
My name is Curt Deiner and I own a home on Green Heights Trail, just north of the
proposed subdivision. My concern is for the wildlife in the swamp and surrounding
area.
Having lived here I can attest to the variety of ducks and birds, in particular a Pileated
Woodpecker which frequents the old growth maples and oaks at this location. I think
the development of this area could produce some beautiful homes, but what assi r-
ances do we have that it will be done responsibly? 1 hate to think my vision of beauti-
fully manicured lawns loading the swamp with pesticides will come true.
• What is the minimum lot size?
• What are the specifications for drainage of storm and yard runoff?
My suggestion would be to delete lots 11 thru 19 on Priorwood Lane and extend the
park along the south edge of the swamp.
Thank you.
a14/a,
Curt Deiner
PRt
P
M N
�NEyp/
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN
FROM: JAMES HAYES
DATE: MARCH 4, 1993
SUBJECT: WESTBURY PONDS
Please enter into the minutes the following comments from Brian
Parker of 16913 Willow Lane, Prior Lake:
- speed limit on all proposed streets should be 25 mph
- opposed to the variance allowing greater than 1000 foot blocks
- Concerned about children's safety walking to and from school
These comments were expressed to me on the phone approximately
one week ago.
4629 Dakota St. SE., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN FN IGI (IFGIRl1MRV FMDI (1VFP
� S
q P
\�':Y N E.5
PLANNING REPORT
SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND ZONING
ORDINANCE TO IMPLEMENT MORE STRINGENT STORM
WATER MA14AGEMENT REGULATIONS
PRESENTER: JOEL RUTHERFORD, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
PUBLIC HEARING: X YES NO
DATE: MARCH 4, 1993
INTRODUCTIO
The purpose of this Public Hearing is to consider amendments to
the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance. These changes
are required by the Metropolitan Council, as part of their
strategy to reduce nonpoint source pollution to all metropolitan
water bodies.
The Planning Commission is required by City Code to hold Public
Hearings to amend the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. The
notices for the Zoning and Subdivision hearings have been
published on February 22 and March 1, 1993, and are scheduled
con'emporaneously. However, there are two distinct Public
Hearings.
BACKGROUND
The Metropolitan council's strategy to reduce nonpoint source
pollution to all metropolitan water bodies includes three
requirements for local governments. These requirements are as
follows:
(1) Adopt design standards for new storm water ponds that
will reduce the contaminant loadings from surface water
runoff, such as those from the National Urban Runoff
Program (NURP);
(2) Local governments in the metropolitan area must follow
the "best management practices" (BMP'S) as outlined in
Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas published by
the Minneso a Pollution ControlAAgency, or an equivalent
set of standards; and
(3) Adopt the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
current shoreland regulations.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 9474230 I Fax(612)4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORIUNRY FMPILT
Local governments will be required to adopt these elements before
the Metropolitan Council will approve Comprehensive Plan
Amendments.
The changes proposed are necessary to incorporate requirements
(1) and (2) into the City Code. Requirement (3), dealing with
new shoreland regulations, is a separate item that is currently
in the process of being added to the City Code.
DISCUSSION
Attached to this report are drafts for Ordinances 93 -05 and
93 -06. Staff is proposing a Public Hearing to amend the City
Code at the City Council meeting on March 15. At that time the
council will make a final decision to accept all of the proposed
amendments. The timeframe adoption is critical in order to
facilitate processing of the Wilds.
The standards proposed to be implemented into the City Code,
_hough required by the Metropolitan Council, will benefit Prior
Lake residents by ensuring sound storm water management practices
to all land disturbing activities. The methods and procedures,
when applied, will reduce the contaminant loadings from surface
water runoff, thus improving water quality in the lakes,
wetlands, streams, and waterways of Prior Lake.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission motion to amend the
Subdivision Ordinance as proposed in Ordinance 93-05, and to
recommend these changes to the City Council. Staff recommends
the Planning Commission make a separate motion to amend
Zoning Ordinance as proposed in Ordinance 93 -06, and to recommend
these changes to the City Council.
MM MC 7
"SBOIOE"
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
ORDI'IANCE NO. 93 -05
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE AND PRIOR LAKE
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE 87 -10.
The council of the City of Prior Lake does hereby ordain:
The following definition is proposed for Section 6 -2 -1: WETLANDS:
of the Subdivision ordinance and City Code:
6 -2 -1: WETLANDS: Lands transitional between terrestrial and
aquatic systems where the water table is
usually at or near the surface or the land is
covered by shallow water. For purposes of
this definition, wetlands must have the
following three attributes:
(a) Have a predominance of hydric soils.
(b) Are inundated or saturated by surface or
ground water at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support a prevalence of
hydrophytic vegetation typically adapted
for liF- in saturated soil conditions.
(c) Under normal circumstances support a
prevalence of such vegetation.
The following language is proposed for Section 6 -4 -2: (J) of the
Subdivision Ordinance and City Code:
6 -4 -2: (J) Physical features which shall include:
1. A delineation of all streams, rivers, public
waters and wetlands located on and immediately
adjacent to the site, including depth of
water, a statement of general water guTlity,
and any classification given to the water body
or wetland by the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources, the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency, and /or the United States Army
Corps of Engineers.
Locatiue, and dimensions of existing storm
water drainage systems and natural drainage
patterns on and immediately adjacent to the
site delineating in which direction and at
what rate storm water is conveyed from the
site, identifying the receiving stream, river,
public water, or wetland and setting rth
those areas of the unaltered site where storm
water collects.
A description of the soils of the site,
including a map indicating soil types of areas
to be disturbed as well as a soil report
containing information on the suitability of
the soils for the type of development proposed
and for the type of sewage disposal proposed
and describing any remedial steps to be taken
by the developer to render the soils
suitable.
Vegetative cover and clear delineations of any
vegetation proposed for removal.
loo year floodplains, flood fringes and
floodways.
The following language is proposed for Section 6 -4 -3: (M) and
Section 6 -4 -3: (N) of the Subdivision Ordinance and City Code:
6 -4 -3: (M) A site construction plan including:
(1) Locations and dimensions of all proposed land
disturbing activities and any phasing of those
activities.
(2) Locations and dimensions of all temporary soil
and dirt stockpiles.
(3) Locations and dimensions of all construction
site erosion control measures necessary to
meet the standards as outlined in Protecting
Water Quality in Urban Areas publis ed by t e
Minneso a Po ution Control Agency, or an
equivalent set of standards.
(4) Schedule of anticipated starting and
completion date of each land disturbing
activity, including the installation of
construction site erosion control measures.
(5) Provisions for mainter,ance of the construction
site erosion control measures during
construction.
(F) A plan of final site conditions -n the same scale
as the pnysical features map showing the site
changes including:
1. Finished grading shown at contours at the same
interval as provided for the existing
contours, or as required to clearly indicate
the relationship of proposed changes to
existing topography and remaining features.
2. A drainage plan of the developed site
delineating in which direction and at what
rate storm water will be conveyed from the
site and setting forth the areas of the site
where storm water will be allowed to collect.
3. The proposed size, alignment, profiles and
intended use of any structures to be erected
on the site.
The following
language is proposed for Section 6 -6 -6: (A) and
Section 6 -6 -6:
(B) of the Subdivision Ordinance and City Code:
6 -6 -6: (A)
Wild Life Habitat and Water Recharge Areas: Marsh
areas which are part of the proposed development
shall be analyzed for purposes of preservation as
potential wild life habitat for birds and animals
as well as to continue providing water purification
and recharge areas for the lake of Prior Lake. If
the City Council determines that marsh areas serve
the public in one or more of these functions then
they may require preservation in whole or in part.
Any alterations or disturbance shall comply with
the requirements of the Wetland Conservation Act,
and other legislation that may limit disturbance to
W-'ld life habitat and water recharge areas.
6 -6 -6: (B)
Filling or Draining: Wetlands must not be drained
or filled, wholly or partially, unless replaced by
restoring or creating wetland areas of at least
equal public value, as permitted by the Wetland
Conservation Act.
The following
language is proposed for Section 6 -6 -7: (A) of the
Subdivision Ordinance and City Code:
6 -6 -7' (A)
Storm water management criteria for permanent
facilities:
1. The subdivider shall use the standards and
guidelines presented in the 1989 edition of
, or an equivalent set of standards.
2. The subdivider shall install or construct, on
or for the proposed land disturbing or
development activity, all storm water
management facilities necessary to manage
increased runoff so that the two -year,
ten -year and 100 -year storm peak discharge
rates existing before the proposed development
shall not be increased and accelerated channel
erosion will not occur as a result of the
proposed land disturbing or development
activity. The subdivider may also make an
in -kind or monetary contribution to the
development and maintenance of community storm
water management facilities designed to serve
multiple land disturbing and development
act?.vities un ?ertaken by one or more persons,
including the subdivider.
The following language is proposed for Section 6 -7 -10: of the
Subdivision Ordinance and City Code:
6 -7 -10:
(A) A drainage system as approved by the City Engineer
shall be provided.
(B) Storm water detention facilities constructed in the
City of Prior Lake shall be designed according to
the standards reflected in the 1989 edition of the
MPCA publication "Protecting Water Quality in Urban
Areas ", and the design criteria from the National
Urban Runoff Program.
This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage
and publication.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Prior Lake this
_ day of 1993.
ATTEST:
City Manager Mayor
Published in the Prior Lake American on the day of
19_
Drafted By:
Joel Rutherford
Water Resources Coordinator
City of Prior Lake
4629 Da::ota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
M m g v
"Z0030E"
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
ORDINANCE NO. 93 -06
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE AND PRIOR LAKE ZONING
ORDINANCE NO. 83 -6.
The Council of the City of Prior Lake does hereby ordain:
The following language is proposed for Section 6.11,B,5,c,(9) of
the Zoning Ordinance, and Section 5 -5 -11: D,5,c,(9) of the City
Code:
(9) A storm water management plan, which shall contain the
following information:
(a) Existing Site Map showing the site and immediately
adjacent areas, including:
(1) The name and address of the applicant, the section,
township and range, north point, date and scale of
drawing.
(2) Location of the tract by an insert map at a scale
sufficient to clearly identify the location of the
property.
(3) Existing topography with a contour interval
appropriate to the topography of the land but in no
case having a contour interval greater than 2
feet.
(4) A delineation of all streams, ri -ers, public waters
and wetlands located on and immediately adjacent to
the site, including depth of water, a statement of
general water quality and any classification given
to the water body or wetland by the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, and /or the United States
Army Corps of Engineers.
(5) Location and dimensions of existing storm water
drainage systems and natural drainage patterns on
and immediately adjacent to the site delineating in
which direction and at what rate storm water is
conveyed from the site, identifying the receiving
stream, river, public water, or wetland and setting
forth those areas of the unaltered site where storm
water collects.
(6) A description of the soils of the site, including a
map indicating soil types of areas to be disturbed
as well as a soil report containing information on
the suitability of the soils for the type of
development proposed and for the type of sewage
disposal proposed and describing any remedial steps
to be taken by the developer to render the soils
suitable.
(7) Vegetative cover and clear delineations of any
vegetation proposed for removal.
(8) 100 y ar floodplains, flood fringes and floodways.
(b) A site construction plan including:
(1) Locations and dimensions of all proposed land
disturbing activities and any phasing of those
activities.
(2) Locations and dimensions of all temporary soil and
dirt stockpiles.
(3) Locations and dimensions of all construction site
erosion control measures necessary to meet the
standards as outlined in the _989 edition of
Protecting Water 4uality in Urban Areas published
by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, or an
equivalent set of standards.
(4) Schedule of anticipated starting and completion
date of each land disturbing activity, including
the installation of construction site erosion
control measures.
(5) Provisions for maintenance of the construction site
erosion control measures during construction.
(c) A plan of final site conditions on the same scale as the
existing site map showing the site changes including:
(1) Finished grading shown at contours at the same
interval as provided above or as required to
clearly indicate the relationship of proposed
changes to existing topography and remaining
features.
(2) A landscape plan, drawn to an appropriate scale,
including dimensions and distances and the
location, type, size and description of all
proposed landscape materials which will be added to
the site as part of the development.
(3) A drainage plan of the developed site delineating
in which direction and at what rate storm water
will be conveyed from the site and setting forth
the areas of the site where storm water will be
allowed to collect.
(4) The proposed size, alignment, profiles and intended
use of any structures to be erected on the site.
(5) A clear delineation and tabulation of all areas
which shall be paved or surfaced, including a
description of the surfacing material to be used;
and
(6) Any other information pertinent to the particular
project which in the opinion of the applicant is
necessarl for the review of the project.
Th_s ordinance shall b9come effective from and after its passage
and publication.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Prior Lake this
day of 1993.
ATTEST:
City Manager Mayor
Published in the Prior Lake American on the day of
19 --
Drafted By:
Joel Rutherford
Water Resources Coordinator
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PRI
r
'i118vES0 ;/
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 18, 1993
The February 18, 1993, Planning Commission Meeting was called to
order by Vice Chairman Arnold at 7:30 P.M. Those present were
Commissioners Loftus, Arnold, Greenfield, Wuellner, Director of
Planning Horst Graser, Assistant City Planner Deb Garross,
Planning Intern Jim Hayes, Acting Secretary Phyllis Knudsen.
Absent was Commissioner Roseth.
ITEM I - REVIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
Minutes were not completed so were continued to next meeting.
ITEM II - DISCUSSION OF WETLAND REGULATIONS
Mr. Pat Lynch, DNR was unable to be present and was unable to
find a replacement. This item will be continued for a later date
and time.
ITEM III - INTRODUCTION OF THE DRAFT 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Deb Garross presented background of three chapters of the
Comprehensive Plan. The City is required by the Metropolitan
Council to plan for certain increments of time. Currently we have
in place a Comprehensive Plan that was adopted in Prior Lake in
1981 and has been amended several times. What a Comprehensive
Plan does basically is to plan for urban services where utilities
will be placed in the community over a certain period of time.
The current plan is based on the year 2000 projection so the
information in that plan relates to an urban service area that
shows where we anticipate development being by the year 2000,
population we anticipate we will have, transportation classified
as arterials, minor streets, etc., also issues relative to
housing, park and recreation, etc.
What the City has gone through the last couple of years is
preparing for the next Comprehensive Plan that will have to be
done that includes long range planning to the year 2010. There
have been several different development projects very recently
that have given us a new focus on what we want to be doing in the
future. There have teen several different studies done relative
to the Hwy.13 Task Force, Lake Advisory Committee, Lake Review
Committee, Economic Development Committee has done quite a bit of
work in different areas. The several different studies that
4629 Dakita St. S.E., Prior Cake, Mmes 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 ' rd (612) 447 -4245
A EQ )PPORNNrrY EMPLOYER
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 2
city staff has done in the last year or so alone with several
retreats, meetings with City Council and other committees, is to
put together a draft of this Comprehensive Plan.
The three components of the Plan will serve as an introduction
to the Planning Commission to update you on what is in these
different chapters. Public hearings will be held over the next 4
to 6 months that will specifically address all the different
elements to the public and the Planning Commission will be
holding those meetings in a series of workshops there will be
input in the community from residents, business community and
different professionals for the components of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Planning Commission is doing some initial work already. A forum
was held with local realtors to start to reflect the residential
market and what: they anticipate happening in Prior Lake, their
views of the community, some of the pros and cons and will
continue these types of meetings to gain input into this. The
objective is to adopt a new comprehensive plan which will be a
total rewrite of the plan that was adopted in 1981, and that
should occur in the next one to two years. What we need to do
once it is adopted is submit the Comprehensive Plan to the
Metropolitan Council who reviews the different chapters in terms
of regional resources. They provide capacity for treatment
through the Blue Lake Treatment Plant for sewer and water, for
certain transportation connections and other elements.
That is basically a generic overview of the Comprehensive Plan
and where we are at.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHAPTER
We have tried to identify general objectives for commercial
development in the community and each chapter is set up in a
similar format. Following that are discussion items of specific
areas of interest and at the end are policy statements or
objectives that the City would like to work on in order to
implement these overall objectives for each particular district.
The Economic Development Committee was formed in the early
1980's. This year the City Council is considering hiring a full
time position for an Economic Development Director. There have
been several activities that have taken place that would prompt
the need for this, one being the City has purchased a 22 acre
parcel along Co.Rd. 21 for a proposed Business /Office Park. It
is hoped that this will spur economic development opportunities.
Prior Lake has not had a focused program in the past, but is
working towards that objective and the Business /Office Park is a
major step in that direction. This committee is coming up with a
marketing plan etc. The Acting City Manager, Kay Kuhlmann has
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 3
been meeting with many business prospects who are interested in
locating in that Park and it is also a tax increment district so
there may be some monies available for certain businesses
providing they meet the criteria that the City has set up for
economic development.
The general objectives for Economic Development are:
1. City will promote high quality and efficient community
services, maintenance of pudic space, buildings, police and fire
protection in order to provide a positive environment for local
economic development.
2. Development of commercial and industrial sectors will be
promoted by the city in order to diversify the tax base. One way
we have accomplished this is on the acquistion of a Park and the
development of it by the City that is a relatively ambitious
project. Most communities do not do this, but rather work
through a private developer in developing property.
3. The City supports the C.R.18 River Crossing construction. We
believe that with improved access both the commerical and
industrial for Prior Lake will be greatly enhanced. That is one
of the major problems in the past is very poor access.
4. The City will continue to stress the importance of good urban
design and land use relationships in order to bolster the image
of the community.
5. The City is committed to providing financial assistance such
as tax increment financing, for private sector initiatives that
are consistent with community objectives.
6. The City is committed to hire personnel and establish
organizational mechanisms to promote and enhance economic
development opportunities. An example is that the City has
worked very strongly wit:_ the local Chamber of Commerce and some
of the other business organizations in the community.
Basically for Prior Lake the commercial area we have got Hwy. 13
with strip commercial. Most of the business district that we have
in the community are located on rely on traffic from Hwy. 13,
C.R. 42 and C.R. 21. Major component of the Economic Development
Plan is to enhance transportation and access to these different
districts. The problem we have with the strip is that you need
to have good access and unfortunately as Prior Lake continues to
develop there are so many different intersections and access
points and design problems with Hwy. 13 that the traffic system
is beginning to break down. One of the elements that this
chapter talks about is in order to improve access in the downtown
area is to implement a ring road system. A part of that system
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 4
has already started by the bowling alley and behind Priordale
Mall is a section of roadway that was put in anticipating a
grocery store development behind the Mall which didn't take
place, one of those links is connected. Another place is the
starting of the re- routing of Panama Ave., at the entrance to
County Market and McDonalds. At some point this will be open to
Panama Avenue which will be re- routed and a signal installed at
the intersection of Five Hawks and Hwy. 13. This should
facilitate the traffic flow. Another area is the old theater
location to provide a better access to drive from one district to
another without entering Hwy. 13.
In the commercial development plan there are different types of
commercial districts than we currently have, i.e., strip
commercial and downtown. The majority of business that are
withstanding in the market place of Prior Lake are service
oriented. Banks, auto repair, gas stations, limited retail, etc.
With improved access to the Bloomington Ferry Bridge which at
some point will connect C.R. 21 and the Shakopee Bypass, some
upgrades of Hwy. 13, C.R. 21 east to 35W. With those types of
improvement Prior Lake will see improved access and because of
that better commercial opportunities for the community.
One of the things the Comprehensive Plan is trying to do is to
implement a new concept of Prior Lake which is a neighborhood
planned commercial district. Instead of having soul reliance on
a strip where you drive someplace. else, we want to provide
limited commercial opportunities with a neighborhood orientation.
Possibly at the intersection of C.R. 21 & 42, north of Raspberry
Ridge might support the neighborhoods around it, maybe a
Kinder -Care type of business, gas, cleaners, convenience store
where people can walk to rather than having a facility right next
to a major highway. We are trying to look at the whole
comprehensive plan to drastically improve pedestrian access and
links between neighborhoods so people can walk and bike. This is
something that is very important and supports the introduction of
trail systems via the park survey done a couple of years ago and
is very popular. The idea is if you have the commercial uses
that work within a neighborhood, that neighborhood will always be
there to support those uses, and if it is designed well and the
uses are planned so they interact with the neighborhood these
will be self sustaining resources and we won't have the situation
of one strip mall popping up and then a few years later that
style goes away and then you have another one a little further
down the road. We are trying to get away from that with the
concept of planned neighborhood commercial districts.
The predominent efforts as far as this draft is concerned at this
point is to basically increase accessibility to these different
districts through better road design, better intersectons and
improvements in pedestrian links, to focus on image. The city
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 5
has just reviewed a landscape ordinance. We are trying to upgrade
the image and work with the business community to do that so we
can create a business community were people want to come and
enjoy the shopping opportunities that are available in the
community.
Town Center is the downtown area and is an area that is
difficult to work with. For the most part, because of Hwy. 13
going through, we don't have a Main Street such as Chaska. A lot
of things have been lost because of the highway and the exodus of
businesses, post office, bank etc., out to the highway. We do
believe at a staff level, that a downtown is very important and
we would like to maintain that image. There was a desire by the
existing business owners to work with the community for making
some of the improvements and even more related was the
accessibility types of things, the concept we have in the
comprehensive plan is Lakefront Passage. As the community is
bisected by C.R. 21 and Hwy. 13 wherever you drive, especially on
C.R. 21, you have a view of the water bodies, ponds, wetlands,
or lake crossing. We want to utilize this and make it more
pedestrian accessible through trail systems and by installing
sidewalks, you can reach the town center area and that is
identified on that corner of 21 & 13 by some type of
identification. This is envisioned in the Comp Plan perhaps a
lifesize replica or statue of a sail boat or something
significant so you would know that you have arrived to the
downtown center. We have also upgraded the parking lot. It is
important to link downtown, Lakefront Park, and the lake.. A few
years ago Lakefront Park was fairly inaccessible. The trail
system was implemented which makes it a beautiful development.
We would like to make the connections of these trail systems to
downtown and develop the peninsula with either a water feature,
pier etc. mainly to get people interested in walking and being in
the downtown area. This would tie the recreation theme to the
business area and make it a full relationship. That is what The
Town Center is all about. We believe that through continued
improvements and working with local businesses and if we maintain
and keep the government building and facilities down here it will
always be a place where people come to meet.
There was a proposal to the north for a Senior Citizen type
housing complex. Putting medical facilities is still a viable
option but basically a redevelopment of that area again opens the
downtown to Lakefront Park. we do need to work with the local
business community to make anything become a reality. At this
point there has been several attempts to plan to create
revitilization plans for downtown but it has not worked. We
should continue with thisat effort and the Comprehensive Plan to
foster relationships between the public and private sector and to
work especially on the downtown linking it to the waterfront
passage area.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 6
Basically these are the elements included in the Economic Plan
and is a general overview and discussion. The rest of the Plan
is based on a number of different studies that have been done
over the years, information from the Prior Lake 2000 research,
different committees and retreats that have taken place over the
years but these chapters just as the rest of the Plan, serve as a
beginning point and through the upcoming hearing process in the
next 1 t0 1.5 years through public input and reaction will
generate interest and ideas that will enhance the Comprehensive
Plan.
Discussion followed on the following : -old section of Hwy 13 when
the new section is extended and traffic lights installed; time
table for the extension of C.R. 21 to Hwy.35W; time table for the
C.R. 21 north to intersect with Bloomington Ferry Bridge Road;
neighborhood shopping districts within new plats; developable
land south of C.R. 82; improving auto access to Lakefront Park
and developing the land off Dakota St.
Discussion followed regarding downtown shopping area and the
Gateway area.
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Short range industrial opportunity plan consists of a 21 acre
industrial park. Park was annexed into the City along with the
buildings. There are problems such as not being subdivided, no
public sewer and water, storm sewer and most of the parcels are
developed. There is a considerable amount of wetlands and sits
on the south shore of Markley Lake, which is a DNR protected
lake. New land uses that might come in are very expensive and
you would have to retrofit. As no utilities are available there,
the types of businesses that the City has allowed into the
Industrial Park are very limited types of uses with low water
usage. The cost of introducing sewer and water relative to the
benefit the businesses receives are minimal and the assessments
are way too high.
Trying to provide industrial expansion is limited to the
north. In addition to looking at a 22 acre parcel the long range
plan we talk about is possibly annexing the northern part of
Section 12. It may look like a large piece of land but in
accuality there is quite of bit of wetland. In total there would
be about 160 acres of land that could be available to offer
business office park opportunities so there is some availability
of long range expansion if the Business /Office Park is successful
and the Industrial Development Plan does recognize that as a
potential opportunity.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 7
Also the Industrial Development Plan recognizes the Leo Vierling
property which would have access from C.R. 18 and C.R. 42. Mr.
Vierling owns approxir=<_ „ly 300 auLes and that is Prior Lakes
best long term opportunity for business industrial development.
Currently that land is enrolled in agricultural preserve program
and in that program the City is in a contract with Mr.Vierling
that he will keep that in agricultural production for a period of
at least 8 years. If either the City or Mr.Vierling decides to
terminate that contract, nothing can be developed on that
property for an additional 8 years. The City has a great
opportunity and Mr. Vierling also for a very large significant
development, such as a large industrial park, or Target Greatland
or shopping facilities, that look for large tracts of land. The
existing commercial district we have is piecemeal properties
here and there with poor access, different owners, transportation
problems. It is hard to accumulate a large enough land mass to
do something significant. Having a large land area available for
long term development, considering that in that time frame these
road improvements are going of occur. We are looking for a
planned commercial development type of use and perhaps
surrounding that to the north some high density to provide
opportunities for people to work there like the Amesbury Bldg.
etc. It would be planned and have some architectural control and
the idea would be to reserve a large piece of land the
opportunity so that significant development could take place on
the parcel.
Basically this is what the Industrial Development Plan talks
about. The Industrial study was done a couple of years ago and
there were 5 potential sites identified. The two that I talked
about are probably the best opportunities and they are the ones
that the Comprehensive Plan has looked at for the long and short
range development.
There also was discussion doing something in conjunction with the
Sioux Community. The City is continuing to work on relations
with the Sioux Community and if the opportunity should come about
doing a joint venture the City would also be interested in doing
something like that, however since this has been written the
Sioux Community has purchased a large amount of land and we don't
really know what is happening out there. We would pursue that
and that would primarily be the responsibility of the Economic
Development Director to deal with marketing, to look at different
types of opportunities for those and for the most part for the
Vierling property because it is in an agricultural preserve there
really cannot be any development of it for a long period of time.
That 1s really an opportunity rather than having it sold in
different pieces, maybe a Burger King here and a McDonalds there,
it would be a large area to develop and the road system hopefully
would be in place about the time that is taken out of ag status.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 8
Discussion followed:
Commissioner Wuellner asked for clarification of the agricultural
preserve program of the Vierling property; also talked about the
different types of businesses that could be foresee;; as maybe
being there due to our limited road access; also about the Wilds
area and some of the other recreational areas, i.e. Cleary Park.
ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN
This section is much increased over what was in the 1981 Plan.
The purpose of the Environmental Plan is one of the fundamental
resources that Prior Lake has to offer and is easily recognized
with its topographic elements, lakes, water bodies, wetlands etc.
makes it a beautiful City with its varying land characteristics
that we have and this Plan seeks to recognize where those
districts are and to include policy statements to insure that
they are protected and that development is incorporated into the
amenity not just cut down the trees or fill in the wetland etc
to accomodate additional development it is more of a desire to
integrate development into the natural surroundings.
What we have done in the Environmental Plan is really a series of
fairly detailed analysis to locate, map where the different
features are and the types of features we felt were important
would be the deep slope areas of over 20% slope, wetlands,
woodland features etc. The intent of the Plan is to basically to
preserve for the use of the public prominent natural resources
and to protect wildlife habitat because those are some of the
most important things that seem to be a common thread that people
say they are attracted to Prior Lake for those high amenity
areas. we do recognize that and I think that the residential
development opportunities that Prior Lake has really are quite
valuable based on the land resources that we have.
Specifically the environmental districts include wetlands
designated protected, wooded areas, bluffs, historic resource
significance, public categories.
In general the policy is when a development comes in that the
development occur in the areas that are suitable for development
and not within these environmental districts and the purpose for
mapping them is to identify for a developer what we think are
significant features and that the development should be
integrated into that and not just lay it on top of it and develop
over it.
The areas that are not well suited for development that do not
have good soils or have problems with hyydrology etc., those areas
should be allocated as open space, public or private open space.
In the natural resource area the intent is to utilize those for
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 9
park purposes, i.e. linear parks, places for interpretive centers
or spaces where people feel comfortable where they are able to
have access to and through these spaces either by walkways and
trying to link those within neighborhoods and throughout the
community.
Another policy statement would be residential living unit or
commercial shall be designed to blend into the natural setting of
the landscape for the enhancement of sound, orderly, economic
growth and development for the protection of the environmental
elements that are associated with that particular development.
In the Woodland District we would be looking at a tree ordinance
for Prior Lake. Right now the only thing we have that would
relate to trees would be in the Subdivision Ordinance where we
require planting of two trees per lot. Shoreland District talks
about limited removal of vegetation and cannot clear cut or
totally take out stands of trees, etc. There are many
communities that have ordinances that talk about woodland
districts, the amount of cover that can be taken out, what is
considered to be significant stands of trees so that there is a
lot better definition and to come up with requirements that talk
about how these areas can be developed so you don't have to rely
on the goodness of heart of someone coming in that we would have
some design flexibility to make sure that the development is
incorporated into the district rather than in spite of the
district.
The Wetland District will be significantly be altered. This was
written before the wetland legislation came into effect and a lot
of the elements are already covered and are more restrictive due
to the wetland legislation. This was prepared about two years
ago and there weren't too many communities we could look to for
ideas. We were looking for development criteria to include
things like setbacks, and walkways into the natural feature
instead of building right up next to them, to be coexisting
instead of destruction of them through the development process.
Public access to waters and natural features and we thougqht was
very important that the people be afforded the opportunity to
enjoy the water and natural resources via good public access to
those prominent neighborhood features. This has been done in the
Wilds development that there are trail systems and park systems
that are integrated throughout the Subdivision. Woodridge
Estates and Carriage Hills where there are several different
types of park areas and open space amenity areas, ponds, etc.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 10
Another element we included in here that Prior Lake has never
included before are view and vista policies where we do have
unique features. The most predominate future development would
be the ridge line that traverses the Jeffers property and Wilds.
It is very beautiful to walk up there, very steep slopes on both
sides and we feel that is very important when there is a
predominant nature feature like that that there is public access.
I think the possibility of a view platform, trail systems etc.,
and to incorporate commercial development and capitalizing as
much as we can on the design of roadways and the design of
subdivisions so that you enhance these natural views that already
exist to make sure that development doesn't inhibit that but
enhances that. There are several areas along the north
shore where you have a nice view of Prior Lake, the causeway by
the marina with a view of North and South Prior Lake and these
are the things that people remember of Prior Lake and we should
capitalize on these features.
The premise of the 2010 Plan is that neighborhoods are very
important intregal part of the community and that people
are Prior Lakes most valuable resource and that the natural
features serve as the communities identifying feature. The whole
plan was written around those premises and the intergration of
public access to and around and among those.
Discussion followed:
Commissioner Greenfield asked about status of the DNR revision;
how will that impact the philosophy and direction of this
proposal; is there some DNR wetland rules changing in the spring?
Commissioner Loftus asked for a 5 minute recess at 9:10 P.M.
Commissioner Arnold reconvened the meeting at 9:20 P.M. Also
suggested to move Item 3 development of the retreat agenda to the
bottom of the agenda and moved on to Other Business.
a.) Discuss calendar schedule for future meetings. The March
4th meeting has been set. There are 3 public hearings that
night; preliminary plat of Westbury Ponds; two hearings held at
the same time on stormwater management and need to be adopted for
the Metropolitan Council and need to amend the Zoning Code and
Subdivision Ordinance and also a lot area variance so that is a
very rigorous schedule.
Also Commissioner Greenfield has put together a calendar to make
sure the items of the Planning Commission wanted to addressed are
brought out in a timely fashion and also to deal with the various
different components of the Comprehensive Plan.
There will be a notice in the Prior Lake American that anyone who
is interested in related to 18% coverage ratio. The City Council
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 11
heald a hearing on Tuesday night which is a continuation of a
request by Progress Land Co. to change coverage ratio of 18% to
amend the Zoning Ordinance to either delete that or change that.
The Planning Commission considered that at a public hearing a
couple of weeks ago and recommended denial. It then went to the
City Council. The City Council has had a tremendous amount of
imput and has been a tremendous amount of interest raised on this
particular subject and they decided at their meeting on Tuesday
night rather than acting on the amendment that they remanded the
issue back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission
has been directed to hold a public workshop next Thursday night
at 7:00 p.m. and to listen to additional public testimony
relative to that proposed amendment, City Attorney Kessel will be
in attendance and the Planning Commission has been directed to
come up with specific facts and findings related to the coverage
ratio.
Commissioner Greenfield read excerpts of the minutes of the City
Council: "Since the the tape of the Planning Commission public
hearing malfunctioned, therefore there is no record of who spoke
at the meeting. Another public hearing will allow people to
address their concerns and to have it on record. Council
concurred that Planning Commission should work with staff in
order to obtain whatever information they may need to make a
decision and that the City Attorney be present at the workshop
session." Mayor Andren noted that a sign up sheet has been sent
out and that the audience will be allowed to sign their name and
address as a record of their attendance of the meeting and staff
will use this sign up sheet as purpose of notification date, time
of the workshop and issue. City Attorney Kessel said that the
purpose of the public hearing that the Planning Commission should
make specific written findings as to their recommendation for the
Council. In the event the Planning Commissions decision is again
appealed, further discussion occurred regarding the
implementation of lot size as part of the workshop discussion.
The Council concurred that future hearings should be held
separate and the ratio coverage public hearing. Motion by
Kedrowski, Seconded by White to table the discussion of lot size
density by the Council for further facts by the Planning
Commission and record a clear verbatum record of the preceedings.
It will be up to the Planning Commission to discuss how you want
to handle the meeting. It will be on tape so that there is a
tape record in addition to the written minutes. Mr. Glenn Kessel
will be here to advise facts and findings. There will be
opportunities for public imput, commentary short presentation by
staff and any information that the Commission would like us to
gather between now and next Thursday we request you let us know
that tonight so that we can prepare materials. Also applicant
would have a chance to present a statement.
F;.ANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 12
commissioner Greenfield discussed the format to follow for the
special meeting. The direction from the council was if there was
any issues or statements that were made by individuals during
that meeting that we ask repeat the questions that we have asked
to them that we want clarification on to make sure that they are
again entered in the tape record.
commissioner Wuellner heard over the past week regarding coverage
ratio that the issue comes up at time of building permit and not
at the time of platting. What about impervious surface coverage
ration because we are mandated by the State DNR as part of the
Shoreland Management Ordinance to adopt a 30% impervious surface
coverage, will that be effectively communicated at time of plat
so that the developer understands what he was getting into? Or
again will it be only on the issue of building permit? I can
perceive the same problem with the Stormwater Management
Ordinance causing the same enforcement problem. How do we
address it?
Horst Graser and Deb Garross spoke to clarify and the term
impervious surface will have to be defined and developed and with
testimony given at the Council meeting that the DNR is flexible
in allowing Cities to define that for themselves. We would be
responsible for designing things.that can be measured and things
we are responsible for permitting for. Maybe at the time of
permit the driveway has to be shown at that time and that is when
the impervious surface is included. We are looking to Mr.
Grittman to help us out on that level as to what has happened in
other communities.
Commissioner Greenfield spoke again on the format of this special
meeting. If the numbers of people show up that are expected, and
each are given 3 minutes or so to speak the meeting could go 3+
hours and then more time when the Commissioners debate. It is
going to be a very difficult and uncomfortable process for the
Commissioners to look at this issue and make a decision that
evening without having the opportunity to look at it further like
we normally do. Felt the workshop /public hearing should be
broken down in three specific elements with the workshop in an
informal setting where the petitioner and public can speak, then
close that portion and then continue after a short recess with a
more structured process, and then have a discussion with each
other in an open forum where we can discuss and mull over this
issue several times. Due to the time restraints of this issue
and due to the charge of Council that it is going to be necessary
for us to try and formulate some kind of a decision that night.
commissioner Greenfield handed out a "talking paper" outline so
that people who have never been to a meeting or spoke in public
might tailor their comments and give them some idea of how to
streamline their thoughts to give to the attendees and have by
the lectern.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 13
Commissioner Greenfield would like to have staff make available
the following: 1. City Council meeting in 1987 staff was
charged to follow ordinances and addresses coverage ratios. He
wants since that time the addresses built since then and indicate
the coverage ratio and those that exceeded the 188 coverage
ratio. 1. List of which builders are in violation of our current
188 and by what degree and amount they have exceeded our present
law. I think it is imperative for us to have the knowledge and a
feel for us to get an understanding of a possible recommendation
for a potential grandfathering of values which might suit and
satisfy the situation to make it agreeable to all parties and it
would be a blind stab in the dark if we don't know what degree
and what problem we have with the developments. This list and
all data should be backed up by good factual data and make
conclusions that are from that data so that good conclusions can
be derived from this data. 3. Covenants applied to Carriage
Hills at the time of the petitioning, how many homes in that
development are currently in violations of our ordinance, and how
many potential homes would be built that have the potential of
violating the ordinance.
Applicant is petitioning the entire coverage ratio be deleted by
the City. He is concerned about any type of issue that would
completely delete the ordinances that we have currently enforce
and we and the public should be aware of the implications and the
affect of that envelope restriction have on the present and
future of our community.
Discussion on gradation, stairstepping, lot sizes etc followed.
Commisisoner Loftus mentioned article in Planning Maggazine about
affordable housing and that maybe at the platting level all
developers would have make an offer of maybe 158 be at affordable
level and that would have to be incorporated in the gradation of
the plat and enter this in the Zoning Ordinance.
Commissioner Wuellner also wants to add Woodbury Estates and any
other new developments included in the coverage ratio study.
Also wants a complete study of area communities of exactly what
are their lot size minimums, width, depth, corner lot
differences, to they incorporate coverage ratios whether
impervious surface or coverage of the home, what are the setback
standards, gradational zoning of lot sizes within a residential
area.
Discussion followed reviewing the time involved in doing this
study by next Thursday and without having a vehicle to enforce
the 188 it was never enforced. Mr. Graser stated staff would try
to get the information desired but it may not be possible. Was
decided to look over the requests to see which ones would be most
valuable for next weeks meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 14
Somewhere back in 1975 there was a purpose for this 18 %. What
was that purpose. Generally the Comprehensive Plan should tell
you what the official control is whether you want to build 50,000
square foot houses or whatever the case is that is the official
control. Once you understand what that purpose is, what was the
design and did it function? Was it successful in its purpose?
commissioner Greenfield asked if it would be advantageous to the
Council to try and attempt to identify the intent of the action
of the Council during 1975 t.- identify that purpose and see how
that relates to our community and carry that forward to current
standards and evaluate it and apply it to what we have right now?
Commissioner Loftus mentioned that per Tom Watkins the reason was
to bring affordable housing into the community to reduce the
minimum lot size from 12,000 to 10,000 square foot at that time
but they had the control because they wanted to control the size
of the building envelope they didn't want it to be over built.
Mr. Graser stated a reason might have been the Metropolitan
Council had an objective to eliminate and breakdown some of the
barriers that we find in subdivisions for low and moderate income
housing and subdivisions were supposed to be responsible for
their share of fair housing. To achieve that there had to be a
"carrot and stick ". The stick was Housing Policy 39. It was a
clearing house for all of these grants and it evaluated your
Zoning Codes. The more in line you were with the Metropolitan
Council guidelines, the higher the point total. If lot sizes
were low you got a high point total. If you practiced
exclusionary housing your total would be very low. If you
required two -car garages you got a low point total etc. I am
sure that the 1975 Council figured to get in on some of this
money and lowered the lct sizes. That is why our Zoning Code
doesn't have a requirement for two car garages and only one lot
size.
That is how we acquired a lot of the park land around Prior Lake
and got a lot of the development grants. When the funds dried up
the "carrot" was gone and everyone reverted back to higher
standards. And now Myron Orfield is trying to break things down
with threats of not receiving sewer etc.
Audience comments were to be aware of all the different lots in
the City because the houses that have already been built can't
add a porch, deck, storage shed etc.
b.) Discuss Sign ordinance review process proposal from
Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. The City Council did
authorize Steve Grittman who worked on the Shoreland Management
Ordinance to do the Sign ordinace and he will conduct a very
similar process through workshop meetings and public hearings,
etc. and will begin this in the next 4 to 6 weeks.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1993 PAGE 15
c.) GTS Land Use Planning Workshop letters were discussed.
Mr. Graser invited the Commissioners to attend a Sensible Land
Use Coalition luncheon. They are well worth it.
Develop Retreat Agenda. Retreat set for March 20, 1993 hopefully
at the Minnesota Horse and Hunt Club. Items for the agenda were
discussed at a previous meeting, i.e., water quality with Joel
Rutherford; how the Planning Commission was going to function;
alternate ways to conduct meetings; what do you want from the
Planning staff.
d.) Commissioner Wuellner mentioned Chicago Conference of
May 1 -5, 1993 and would be willing to attend and thinks maybe two
should go or maybe one staff person.
commissioner Greenfield brought up the realtors meeting and
reminded everyone that we would formulate a talking memo,
discussions, follow -ups and bring conclusions and possible
motions as a result of the realtors. He wants this put on the
agenda soon and earlier on the agenda
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WUELLNER, SECONDED BY LOFTUS TO ADJOURN
THE MEETING. Signified ayes Greenfield, Wuellner, Loftus,
Arnold. MOTION PASSED.
PRI
v x
411N ESO/
SPECIAL WORKSHOP /PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 25, 1993
The February 25, 1993 Special Planning Commission Workshop /Public
Hearing was called to order by Vice Chairman Arnold at 7:06
P.M. Those present were Commissioners Arnold, Loftus, Wuellner
and Greenfield, Director of Planning Horst Graser, Assistant
City Planner Deb Garross, Planning Intern Jim Hayes, Building
Official Gary Staber, City Attorney Glenn Kessel, and Acting
Secretary Phyllis Knudsen. Commissioner Roseth was absent.
Vice Chair Arnold reviewed the format to be followed during this
special workshop /public hearing.
Dale Runkel, Warren Israelson Developer, and Ward Anderson,
attorney representing Progress Land Company, reviewed their
statements regarding the proposed amendment to delete the 188 lot
coverage ratio for single family and two family dwellings located
within all residential districts of the Prior Lake Zoning
Ordinance. They feel the issue is citywide and the
recommendation that the 188 lot coverage be removed and if there
is a compromise to look at some type of impervious surface ratio
that would be high enough take into account todays market price
with the homes that are being built.
Horst Graser stated the purpose of tonight's workshop is to
collect input testimony from the audience on this petition in the
R -1 and R -2 Districts. The issue came before this Commission on
January 21, 1993, which was lightly attended and on a 3:1 vote
recommended that the Ordinance be upheld. It went to the City
Council, considerable more interest was generated and the Council
remanded the issue back to the Planning Commission for a hearing.
The goal for this meeting is to take public testimony and
develop facts and findings in an effort to make a recommendation
to the City Council at a hearing to be held on February 26,
1993.
Horst Graser chronologically detailed when the 188 coverage ratio
came into effect and what has happened with it since then. At
first surveys were not required but since 1985, when Gary Staber
was hired, surveys, elevations, drainage, etc., are now required
so the determination of coverage is more accurately known. In
1988 the City bought a digitizer to easily determine irregular
shaped lots etc.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNn Y D&LOYER
PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 25, 1993 PAGE 2
Horst showed transparencies of the study of different communities
that were contacted as to their coverage ratios, do they use
impervious ratio formulas on lots especially when they are on
lakes or wetlands, average lot size, average market value, etc.
In conclusion: why does the City of Prior Lake need coverage
ratios? Is it to protect against larger houses? Probably not.
Does it increase setbacks? No it doesn't, the setbacks stay
constant. The only issue you would have with the coverage ratio
is it would control the amount of open space you would have in
the back yard. Does it increase lot sizes? Probably not. Does
it increase density? The issue of lot sizes and density are not
related. Is it a duplicate standard? Perhaps. Why do we need
setbacks, front, rear, side and a coverage ratio, and a minimum
lot size? The conclusion we came to was fundamentally that the
City Council i 1975, when the lot size was lowered to 10,000
square feet, the benefit was to the public and that benefit was
to reduce the cost of the lot size in the housing equation. As
far as the 188, that is debatable. How is it measurable? I
don't know if it is or not.
The issue to the Planning Commission tonight is to determine
facts and findings and enter them into the record for transmittal
to the City Council tomorrow night.
Vice Chairman Arnold called Public Hearing to order at 7:06 P.M.
and outlined the format desired and asked that brief statements
be made without duplication of comments.
Tom Watkins, 5242 Frost Point Circle S.E., stated he was on the
1975 City Council that reduced the lot size from 12,000 to 10,000
square feet as a minimum, not as the standard. The 188 meant a
large house would require a proportionately larger lot. We
assumed that this logic would prevail. The intent of this change
was to promote or keeip available affordable housing within the
City. It was not done with Grants in mind. He believes the
developers and real estate community is entitled to relief but
unsure of how this can be accomplished, Mr. Watkins feels minimum
lots are a necessity but there should be maximum structure
coverages and we should go back to the 12,000 square foot lot
size.
Carl Hansen, 4065 Raspberry Ridge Road, stated the Citizen Forum
presented potential R -1 zoning changes on October 12, 1992. Mr.
Hanson toke 197 contemporary designed homes for width and depth,
related that to lot frontage width and depth and has since added
foundation sizes for both 2 and 3 car garages to analyze the
effect the coverage ratio would have on home sizes and lot sizes
assuming an 188 coverage ratio. Mr. Hanson found that a larger
home generally means a larger foundation square footage. This
generally implied a wider home thus implying a larger lot.
Developers who wish to build in Prior Lake need to read,
understand and follow our ordinances. Developers should not
presume to make changes to our Ordinances having found that they
have errored and do not meet them and feels there is no
PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 25, 1993 PAGE 3
justification to change 18% coverage. If Carriage Hills would
have been platted with a minimum lot size of 12,000 or 12,500
square feet as recommended we would not have this problem today.
Mr. Hanson urged the Planning Commissioners to hold fast to
enforce "MY" cities zoning ordinances. Let this matter be
resolved in a manner that benefits the current and future
citizens of Prior Lake. There should be some compromise for the
specific lot problem. Mr. Israelson should review what style of
home he has listed to be built on specific lots. The Zoning
ordinance is long overdue in being updated and the 18% is
somewhat restrictive in the lower sized lots especially when
applied to lots with 6,000 square foot. Mr. Hanson liked the 18%
but felt a compromise of an increased number might be in order.
Mary Ann Whiting, 14897 Manitou Road.
organized as a result of the concern
Hills Subdivision. The citizens and
repeatedly to put these homes on
signed requesting him to plat larger
new owners.
ordinance,'
our community, and citizens value
did not read the ordinance at tim
the 18% coverage ratio. It is
out what is allowable and it is 'c.
there is an 18% maximum cove:
inform buyers to check with the C.
This is not the forum to address
not enforced the law consistently,
uniformly enforced it does not ma]
defense. We have 'heard that othe
coverage ratio however' they do
similar results i.e., higher mini)
R -1 zones, etc. We will have togs
consider for Carriage Hills to a
platted to be increased to a high
that increase the minimum lot 's9
12,500 square feet with 85' front
dealt with we need to start plann
Bob Barsness, 5400 Fairlawn Shores
Economic Development Committee. .}
that the lot coverage has not beer
years and for that reason we felt
that they eliminate the 18% covet
enforced that the people with;ez
difficulties as far as expanding a
felt that homes that were t
difficulties as far as variances _c
of the coverage requirement and of
concerns for the City. For - that «r
feel the 188 should be eliminated.
s!.
PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 25, 1993 PAGE 4
Bud Waund, 15196 Edgewater Circle stated he brought statements
that were signed by 38 different individuals all of which are
reactors, or reactors representing builders who live in Prior
Lake. Mr. Waund feels the 18$ is outdated, and does not
accommodate todays housing market. Enforcement of the 18% rule
would have far - reaching implications upon current property owners
for if what they have is not in compliance it would be impossible
for them to rebuild if the structure were destroyed, would
prevent the owner to transfer the existing property to a new
owner with the assurance that the property is in compliance with
local zoning ordinances and would have serious affect of the
value or devaluation of their property. The land set aside by
the developer for neighborhood parks preserves the green space
within the project and would prevent the overbuilt look we all
wish to avoid. The 18% is outdated, needs to be studied in an
effort to reach a compromise. This study should not hold up
current developments but rather be used to enhance future growth.
We must overcome the concern that Prior Lake is not prepared for
development proposals or staff to accommodate the building
process. It is my opinion as a Prior Lake homeowner why Carriage
Hills and not one of the other subdivisions, and could it have
been avoided? Ask these questions of yourself. My opinion is
that the 183 should be eliminated. How can we have continuity
and smoothness so we are not interrupting, pulling the strings
and bringing everything to a halt so that we have developers who
have very good intentions, up and above board, putting up maybe
the nicest development that is being put in Prior Lake in a
number of years, advertising Prior Lake.
Tony Thelen, 15233 Highway 13, is a custom home builder and has
built in many communities and feels the 183 has to be changed.
He has never been reprimanded for building a house too big on a
lot. Mr. Thelen stated, if this doesn't change, most people do
not realize what is going to happen to the value of their
property.
Blake Immefall, 5760 Birchwood Ave. stated he has purchased a lot
in Carriage Hills and now feels he cannot build a house as the
permit is on hold due to the fact the house is a few percentage
points over the 183. He now has to now look for a different
location as his former house has been sold and uproot his family
move to a different town because there isn't a spot where he can
upgrade his standard through the community. He did not feel the
restrictions are going to endanger anyone's lot price and as a
future land owner in Carriage Hills and as spokesman for future
buyers we are not trying to raise a raucus over the 183 coverage,
we are just trying to upgrade our house. He did not think it was
fair to his family that he was unable to build and upgrade by
wanting a 3 car garage.
Deb Garross, Assistant City Planner, stated she has workad with
the City for approximately 7 years and did want to clarify for
the record a couple of things of importance. 1. It has been
mentioned several times there has been inconsistent enforcement
of this. I would like to clarify there has not been inconsistent
PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 25, 1993 PAGE 5
enforcement, it has not been enforced. when the issue came up
with Progress Land Company we did contact the City Attorney and
it was upon his advice that we begin to enforce the 18% and for
the last several weeks building permits have been held up on his
advice. 2. There has been comments about surveys and how easy
it would be able to identify what coverage ratios are and I would
concur if land came in and lots came in as been shown on the
transparencies it would be very simple to do that. That is
simply not the case and I would love to see anyone come in with a
lakeshore lot of which there are over 1,000 and not know where
the 904 contour is and not have that surveyed and identify what
the lot area is. It is impossible to do that. There is many
situations. Prior Lake is a lake community and as you can see by
looking at the road systems etc., we do not have a grid system in
this community and I feel very strongly in mentioning that
because I have spent the last four days digitizing the 72 lots
that we have just to get some idea of where we stand in terms of
this coverage and also our Intern Jim Hayes has done that and it
is something that takes skill to do and the slides that have been
shown have been very typical. I don't think there was one square'
lot with a square home, and when you are calculating for 18 %+ you
do have to be fairly accurate. If uou were to ancly that and
for the F
that. "'It
scale off`
different 'r
something.,
Planning Cc
an Ordinan
Management"
surface ' an
Commission:
coverage i
clear how
calculating
is respons
feet from the property line. Th
they set the stakes with the
that would be a very valuable
Commission tonight to look at an
Whether you stay with the
stronger language be included
reviewed to include, whether you
or whether you go to impervious`
are a part of the compromise'
Commission come up with very def,
are talking about in a way that
this community. 3. Of the 72
was not a scientific study, they
PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 25, 1993 PAGE 6
the best we could with the time constraints we had and it is not
an all inclusive list. Basically are plats since the mid 1980's
and in that we have not (enforced the 18% coverage but in this
case for the most part the lot coverage is less than 18 %. Also
the issue with dealing with 10,0000 square foot lots when you
look at the subdivision for the most part they do not average
just 10,000. There has always been a gradation or has been until
this point and with non - enforcement the highest percentage that
we came up with in this limited list is 22/23 %. If the 18% is
such a needed item I ask what is it that we are trying to
control. This also applies to - larger lot subdivisions
approximately 1000 are substandard or less than 10,000 square
feet and the majority of those lots were subdivided in township
days and the majority of properties were annexed into the City.
The ordinance as it stands right now does not have anything that
says that the 18% only applies to lots created after X day'. It
would apply to all lots no matter what size and the concern that
staff has is that the 18% as it is written', does not take into
10
ty
and
very is
One of
hearing
tvoe of
an
plan is not very definitive. It has very
statements and is very difficult to appply
development situations. The City Staff has in+
worked very hard to come up with a comprehens
through and do a lot of zoning amendments deali
issues at this point is premature and what n
the comprehensive plan process where you can ho
the public.
PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 25, 1993 PAGE 7
Tom Watkins, 5242 Frost Point Circle S.E. commented on the lots
of record created prior to Ordinance 75 -12 are grandfathered lots
of record not subject to the 183 coverage and was a policy for
the administration at that time.
Recess was called at 9:40 P.M. Public hearing reconvened at 9:45
P.M.
Discussion by the Commissioners were on: the enforcement of the
183 coverage, if any variances were granted, number of permits
that exceed the 183, current building trends, overlapping
districts, 253 coverage standard suggested, and control of
building coverage is needed.
Comments were on the following form the public sector:
Carl Hanson -felt that discussion is being repeated.
Tom Watkins -time to get items in order.
Walt Jobst - explained his calculations on lot coverage
Recess called at 10:40 P.M. Meeting reconvened at 10:55 P.M.
Dale Rucke -the problem is the smaller lots within the City.
Bud Waund -not enough information to make a decision this evening.
John Egan- houses are larger now than when development first
stated in Prior Lake and the Commissioners should consider that
aspect.
MOTION BY GREENFIELD, SECONDED BY LOFTUS, TO RECOMMEND TO THE
CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION TO ADJUST MAXIMUM COVERAGE OF 223 ON
ALL LOTS OF RECORD FROM THIS DATE FORWARD.
Discussion on the motion followed. Commissioner Wuellner voiced
his objections to the motion. Commissioner Greenfield stated
that all the ordinances need to be brought up to the 1990's level
of standards. Commissioner Loftus suggested one rule for
impervious surface.
Vote taken signified by ayes: GREENFIELD, ARNOLD, LOFTUS. Nayes:
WUELLNER. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY GREENFIELD TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
Vote taken signfied ayes by Loftus, Greenfield, Arnold, and
Wuelner. MOTION CARRIED. Public Hearing closed at 11:12 P.M
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY WUELLNER, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes Loftus, Wuellner, Arnold, and
Greenfield. MORTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 11:15 P.M.
Horst W. Graser Phyllis Knudsen
Director of Planning Acting Recording Secretary
■
March 4, 1993
Prior Lake School District 719
city of Prior Lake
Jim Allen
Tom Kearney
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
This letter will document the understanding reached on a staff
level between the City of Prior Lake, Jim Allen and Tom Kearney
(the Developers) and Prior Lake School District 719 with respect
to the proposed plat of Westbury Pond.
The proposed plat of Westbury Pond is currently being platted by
the Owners /Developers Jim Allen and Tom Kearney, into single
family residential lots. Both the City of Prior Lake and School
District 719, based on their objectives, have reached an
agreement with Jim Allen and Tom Kearney.
The objective of School District 719 is to acquire in fee simple
title through land dedication, five (5) additional acres of land
to be added to their existing Five Hawks site to provide the
opportunity to construct a second school on the Five Hawks site.
The objective of the City of Prior Lake is to establish a
neighbcrhood park serving the residents of the neighborhood with
park improvements that include two (2) to four (4) softball
fields, sliding and climbing apparatus, and other improvements as
may be appropriate for a neighborhood park. The objective of the
developer 1s not to lose any lots, incur only minimal expenses as
a result of any reduction of the subdivision, and the development
would not be delayed.
The City of Prior Lake, School District 719, and the Developer
have resolved as follows:
1. All parties have agreed to a revised design of the
subdivision (March 2, 1993 - attached), which is consistent
with the objectives of the City of Prior Lake, School
District 719, and the Developer.
2. The revised design of the subdivision will dedicate open
space to be utilized by the City of Prior Lake and School
District 719 as may be appropriate.
School District 719 will convey to the Developer about 1.3
acres of school district property located in the southeast
corner of the Five Hawks site to be incorporated in the
revised design of the subdi•ision.
To allow the Developer to proceed with the platting process
of the original design to avoid delays.
To amend the preliminary plat at a later date incorporating
the revised design. The revisions will not interfere with
the first phase final plat or improvements
The cost of revising the preliminary plat will be the
responsibility of School District 719 with an estimated cost
between $1000.00 to $3000.00.
The City of Prior Lake and School District 719 will enter
into a Joint powers agreement for use, improvement, and
maintenance of the property, the size and dimension of which
are yet to be determined.
This agreement is conditional upon the approval of the
legislative bodies of the city of Prior Lake and independent
School district 719.
or or
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
719
or the DEVELOPERS
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
Thursday, March 18, 1993
7:30 p.m.. Call Meeting to Order.
a) Review Minutes of Previous Meeting.
b) Review Minutes of February 4, 1993
Planning Commission Meeting
7:35 p.m. Consider variance application for
Charles Lackey - 5630 Fairlawn Shores Trail
8:15 p.m. Review of Industrial Park Standards
by Consultant Phil Carlson.
+EDC members will be in attendance
Other Business
a) Discuss and develop conclusions from
workshop with area realtors.
All times stated on the Planning Commission Agenda, with the
exception of Public Hearings, are approximate and may start a few
minutes earlier or later than the scheduled time.
4629 Dakota St. S.E. Prior Lake, Mtmiesota 55372 1 Ph (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORPUMYY s.BLOV R
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
MARCH 4, 1993
The March 4, 1993, Planning Commission Meeting was called to
order by Acting Chairman Arnold at 7:30 P.M. Those present were
Commissioners Arnold, Loftus, Wuellner and Greenfield, Director
of Planning Horst Graser, Assistant City Planner Deb Garross,
Associate Planner James Hayes, and Secretary Rita Schewe.
ITEM I - REUIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
As the Commissioners had just received the minutes from the
February 18, 1993, regular Planning Commission meeting and the
February 25, 1993, Special Workshop /Public Hearing which were
quite lengthy, Commissioner Arnold advised review of the minutes
would be moved to the end of the agenda.
Recess was called at 7:33 P.M. as the next item was scheduled for
7:35 P.M. The meeting was reconvened at 7:35 P.M.
ITEM II -LOT AREA VARIANCE -RANDY DELENT /MIKE LAMBERT
Deb Garross presented the information for the applicant's
representative Doreen Siplinger of Realty World as she was unable
to speak due to a case of laryngitis but was present in the
audience for questions.
The request is for a 2,804 minimum lot area variance for 16536
Spring Avenue. The site is part of Lot 6, Green Heights First
Addition. The applicants wish to construct a single family home.
No specific house plan has been determined at this time but if
the variance is granted it would be constructed to fit the area
allotted. Without the variance the lot is not buildable.
Ms. Garross stated the subject site and adjacent three parcels
are considered lots of record as per City Section 5 -4 -1 (C) . The
subject site contains 7,196 square feet, has considerable relief,
and is wooded. Precedent has been set as variances have been
granted for two lots in the neighborhood for single family homes.
Recommendation from staff is to approve the variance as
requested. Hardship is not the result of the applicant but is
the result of subdivision practices of a previous government
body.
James Berg 3893 Green Heights Trail, stated he is the owner of
Lras 3 and 4 and part of Lot 8 and would take legal action if his
portion of Lot 8 is jeopardized and was concerned on the
reference to access.
4629 Dakota St SE, Prior take, Mnnmta 55372 / Ph. (612) 447 -0230 / Fax(612)447-4245
AN �(X AC OPPOrtnRNfrr EMPLOYER
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MARCH 4, 1993 PAGE 2
Doreen Siplinger stated she was under the assumption Lot 8 did
belong to someone other than the Schere's.
Debbie Van Valkenburg 3945 Green Heights Trail, voiced her
concerns on environmental issues and felt that homes are too
small.
Comments from the Commissioners were on ownership of adjacent
lots, building options, and landlocked lot.
MOTION BY WUELLNER, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO APPROVE A MINIMUM LOT
AREA VARIANCE OF 2,804 SQUARE FEET FOR 16536 SPRING AVENUE.
RATIONAL BEING THE SUBJECT SITE IS A LOT OF RECORD THAT WAS
SUBDIVIDED UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF A FORMER GOVERNMENT BODY
THEREBY CAUSING A HARDSHIP WHICH IS NOT THE RESULT OF ACTIONS BY
THE APPLICANT, PRECEDENT HAS BEEN SET BY PREVIOUS VARIANCES
GRANTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT WOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO
THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
Vote taken signified ayes by Wuellner, Loftus, Arnold, and
Greenfield. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM II PUBLIC HEARING - WESTBURY PONDS - PRELIMINARY PLAT AND
VARIANCE
The Public Hearing was called to order at 8:05 P.M. by
Acting Chairman Arnold. The public was present and a sign -up
sheet was circulated.
Ron Swanson of Valley Surveying Company represented the
applicants, Westbury Development Corporation. Mr. Swanson stated
they are requesting preliminary plat approval of approximately 60
acres bounded on the south by S.T.H. 13 and the existing plat of
West Edge Estates, on the east and northeast by Five Hawks Avenue
and Five Hawks Elementary School, on the north by Pershing Avenue
and an older plat of Spring Brook Park, and on the west by
Willows Sixth Addition. There are 97 lots proposed for single
family homes in the subdivision with 2.8 acres dedicated for
active park land and 15.9 acres for open space adjacent to the
wetlands and steep slope areas. The density is 2.9 units per
acre. The construction of a berm with shrubs is planned to
enhance the lots bordering Highway 13. A sediment and a
reflector pond is proposed to clarify stormwater runoff. A
variance to increase block lengths of three blocks within the
subject site is being requested at this time also.
Mr. Swanson stated that an agreement between the developers, City
of Prior Lake and the School District is in the process of being
negotiated that would benefit all parties concerned. The
agreement calls for part of the plat to be annexed to rant
additional land to the City which will be used for joint
recreation facilities and future school site.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MARCH 4, 1993 PAGE 3
James Hayes, Associate Planner presented the information as per
memo of March 4, 1993. Mr. Hayes advised the Commissioners there
are two applications before them and would require a motion on
each. They should be considered contemporaneously because of the
interrelationship of the variance to the subdivision proposal.
on August 6, 1992, the Planning Commission recommended approval
of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan which changed the
sub)ect site from medium density residential to low density
residential and rezoning from R -3 medium residential and B -3
general business to R -1 single family low density residential.
The developer has dedicated 15.9 acres as outlot A which contains
wetlands and steep slope areas plus 2.78 acres for a park
adjacent to the school property. MNDOT has discouraged
additional road access to T.H.13 thereby compelling the developer
to plat the extension of Willowwood Street to connect with Five
Hawks Avenue, the school property, and wetlands, resulting in
block length variances required for three blocks. The
signalization of the Five Hawks and Hignway 13 intersection is a
strong possibility in the future which would aid considerably in
pedestrian and traffic flow. The home styles proposed will be
consistent with the styles of adjacent neighborhood development.
Horst Graser, Planning Director, outlined the joint powers
agreement draft with the School District, Westbury Ponds
Developers and the City of Prior Lake. This would consist of an
alternative design by exchanging property in certain areas. The
objective of the school is to build a second school, the
objective of the City is to acquire property for parks, and the
objective of the developer is to continue the platting process
and not lose any lots or time. The draft proposed would be a
win /win situation for all concerned. If this is agreed upon
there would be a replat of the second phase to the subdivision to
accommodate a land exchange between the School District and
project.
Ron Bentler 16446 inguadona Beach, voiced his concerns on the
wetlands and of increased traffic in the area.
Michelle Lein 3852 Pershing Street, stated her concern was the
traffic, effect of construction to the swamp, and wooded areas
and would like assurance it would be protected as presented.
Dick Behler 3669 Willow Beach Street, had questions on lot sizes,
holding pond filter process, signal at Five Hawks and Highway 13
and width of Willowwood.
Larry Anderson, City Engineer, answered the question on the
signal and stated there was insufficient traffic to warrant a
signal at this time. With the addition of the development
traffic, the possibility of warranting a signal would increase.
Mr. Hayes read into the record a letter from Curt Deiner, 3803
Green Heights Trail SW, voicing his concern on the wildlife in
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MARCH 4, 1993 PAGE 4
the wetland and surrounding area, minimum lot size, and
specifications for drainage of storm and yard runoff. A telephone
message from Brian Parker of 16913 Willow Lane stated he Pelt the
speed limit should be lowered to 25 MPH, was opposed to the
vzariance allowing over 1000 foot blocks, and on children's safety
when walking.
Comments from the Commissioners were on, realignment of County
Road 23, reduction of speed limit schedule of development
phases, environmental concerns, drainage, stacking distances of
vehicles at intersection, street lighting, maintenance of park
trails, and clarification of architectural language.
Mr. Anderson advised that the speed limit for residential areas
is mandated by the State and could not be changed but a request
was sent to lower the speed limit to 45 MPH on Highway 13 past
170th Street. The Storm Water Management program 1s in place
as guidelines for developers. The water quality will be
improved.
Ron Bentler inquired on the width of park paths and on the
preservation of wetland wildlife.
Dick Behler asked if Five Hawks Avenue could be extended to the
north.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY GREENFIELD, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY
COUNCIL THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WESTBURY PONDS BE APPROVED
CONTINGENT ON THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
A. THE SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, AND STREET PLANS MUST BE
SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER.
B. THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, STORM SEWER, GRADING, AND EROSION
CONTROL PLANS MUST BE SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY
ENGINEER.
C. APPROPRIATE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS BE PROVIDED
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ENGINEER.
D. ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE MEMO FROM THE CITY
ENGINEER.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Greenfield, Arnold, and
Wuellner. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY GREENFIELD, THAT THE VARIANCES ON
BLOCK 6 FOR 415 FEET, BLACK 1 FOR 371 FEET, AND BLACK 7 FOR 30
FEET IN WESTBURY PONDS BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Greenfield, Wuellner, and
Arnold. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY WUELLNER, SECOND BY GREENFIELD, TO CLOSE PUBLIC
HEARING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Wuellner, Greenfield, Arnold, and
Loftus. MOTION CARRIED. Public Hearing closed at 9:50 P.M. A
recess was called at 9:50 P.M. The meeting was reconvened at
10:02 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MARCH 4, 1993 PAGE 5
ITEM III - PUBLIC HEARING - SUBDIVISION AND ZONING ORDINANCES
AMENDMENT
The Public Hearing was called to order by Acting Chairman Arnold
at 10:02 P.M. The public was not in attendance.
Deb Garross informed the Commissioners the public hearing was on
two issues, an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance and an
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.
Joel Rutherford, Water Resources Coordinator, presented the
information on these amendments as per the memo of March 4, 1993.
These amendments are meant to implement tte requirements by the
Metropolitan Council as part of their strategy to reduce
non -point source pollution into all metropolitan water bodies.
The requirements are as follows:
Adopt design standards for new storm water ponds that will
reduce the contaminant loadings from surface water runoff,
such as those from the national Urban Runoff Program(NURP).
Local governments in the metropolitan area must follow the
"best management practices" (BMPPS) as outlined in
Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas published by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, or an equivalent set of
standards; and
Adopt the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources current
shoreland regulations.
Local governments will be required to adopt these elements before
the Metropolitan Council - gill approve Comprehensive Plan
Amendments. Mr. Rutherford defined the various sections of the
proposed language in the amendments as outlined in the drafts
93 -05 and 93 -06. The standards proposed to be implemented into
the City Code, though required by the Metropolitan Council, will
benefit Prior Lake residents by ensuring sound storm water
management practices to land disturbing activities. The methods
and procedures, when applied, will reduce the contaminant
loadings from surface water runoff, thus improving water quality
in the lakes, wetlands, streams, and waterways of Prior Lake.
MOTION BY WUELLNER, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY
COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT DRAFT 93 -05 TO THE
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.
Vote taken signified ayes by Wuellner, Loftus, Arnold, and
Greenfield. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY WUELLNER, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY
COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT DRAFT 93 -06 TO THE ZONING
ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Wuellner, Arnold, and
Greenfield. MOTION CARRIED.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MARCH 4, 1993 PAGE 6
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY GREENFIELD, TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Greenfield, Wuellner, and
Arnold. MOTION CARRIED. The public hearing was closed at 10:30
P.M.
The minutes of February 18, 1993, were reviewed at this time.
commissioner Greenfield requested that on page 7, paragraph 3,
line 16, the word spoken as "ag" be spelled out to read
"agricultural ". Commissioner Loftus requested that on page 14,
paragraph 3, line 5, the word "envelope" be deleted as a point of
clarification to the issue.
MOTION BY WUELLNER, SECOND BY GREENFIELD, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES
OF FEBRUARY 18, 1993, AS CLARIFIED.
Vote taken signified ayes by Wuellner, Greenfield, Arnold, and
Loftus. MOTION CARRIED.
The minutes of the Special Workshop /Public Hearing of February
25, 1993 ware reviewed at this time. Corrections were as
follows: Commissioner Wuellner requested the following
corrections; page 1, paragraph 3, line 1, insert the title
"Planning Consultant" after the name Dale Runkel; page 7,
paragraph 6, line 1, correct the spelling of "Runkel "; and page
7, paragraph 11, line 2, correct the spelling of the name
"Wuellner ".
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY WUELLNER, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF
FEBRUARY 25, 1993, AS CORRECTED.
vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Wuellner, Greenfield, and
Arnold. MOTION CARRIED.
A brief update on the Planning Commission Retreat was given by
Deb Garross. This will be held at the Canterbury Inn on March
20, 1993.
MOTION BY WUELLNER, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Wuellner, Loftus, Arnold, and
Greenfield. MOTION CARRIED.
The meeting was adjourned at 10 :40 P.M. Tapes of meeting on file
at City Hall.
Horst W. Graser Rita M. Schewe
Director of Planning Recording Secretary
1PlZIQ° \
F. 7
"VA03PC"
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
SITE ADDRESS:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
HISTORY /BACKGROUND
#1
VARIANCE APPLICATION
CHARLES LACKEY
5630 FAIRLAWN SHORES TRAIL
DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER
YES X NO
MARCH 1
The Planning Department received a variance application for Lot
28 and the east 10 feet of Lot 27, Fairlawn Shores. The proposal
is to demolish an existing cabin then build a new single family
home attached to the existing garage as indicated on the attached
drawings. The variances requested are as follows:
1. 2.5' east side yard variance from 10' setback requirement.
2. 37' lakeshore variance from 75' setback requirement.
3. 10$ lot coverage ratio variance from 22% requirement.
4. 13.5% impervious surface variance from 30% requirement.
PREVIOUS PROPOSALS:
A previous owner, Lee Landsteiner, constructed a three stall
detached garage on the southerly part of the subject site in
August of 1987. The garage was located in a manner to kermit a
future home addition similar to the development proposed in this
application. The existing cabin is located within the floodplain
and contains a deck which encroaches over the 904 contour. There
is no record of the year built for the cabin on file with the
Planning Department.
PHYSIOGRAPHY
The subject site contains 60' of width and approximately 7,952
square feet of area. The lot is quite short (131' measured from
the center of the lot to the 904 contour). The entire building
envelope for the site once setbacks are applied is approximately
25 x 39' (975 square feet), with the existing garage occupying 32
x 26' (832 square feet). The elevation of the site drops
approximately 33 feet from the southeast corner of the lot to the
904 elevation. The subject site contains several development
constraints due to its width, area and topography.
4629 Dakota St. SE., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORiUNrrY E4PLOYER
ADJACENT USES:
Th e fca 7 c� uses are single family homes which range from
relatively new construction to older, remodeled homes.
ALTERNATIVES
Approve the variances as requested.
Continue the application for further study.
Deny the variance application.
RECOMMENDATION
Alternative #1, to approve the setback, lot coverage and
impervious surface variances as requested, based upon specific
hardship findings as determined by the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION
The following hardship considerations are presented for
discussion purposes: The lot is a substandard lot of record
subdivided and developed prior to annexation into the corporate
limits of Prior Lake. The removal of the existing cabin will be
a substantial improvement to the site increasing the lakeshore
setback by approximately 40' (the existing deck encroaches
approximately 2 over the 904 contour, the proposed setback is
38 measured from the 904 contour). The proposed construction
is located at a lakeshore setback similar to other homes within
the neighborhood. A nonconforming structure, located within the
floodplain of Prior Lake is proposed to be removed and replaced
with a conforming structure. The hardship is not the result of
the applicants but rather is a result of platting activities of a
former government jurisdiction. The application of current
zoning standards to the site results in a severely limited
building envelope which jeopardizes the buildability of the lot
but for variance consideration. The proposed development is
consistent with the spirit and intent of the Zoning ordinance and
will not be detrimental to the health and welfare of the
neighborhood.
M`4X ::._ _ .ip ' u
FRI
IU f lbld?]7lMJ] P.G6 0
i.P a Y�f
Phm1 P.19-®� -®CJ4
Pbone: eLa_2a2 JUMW
PhanR:
.v _
M h!
�o
am the app).icant Previously sought to plate rewne, obtain a vaeftm or aonditionel
we pewit an the subject site or 8W part of it? Yes -X — „W
abxt wo rued: .*ice
I L 1.
g!)Oaepiteted on form. (B)Fi11M fee. (OProperty � kwaloatim the
IC.I. elevations to properly Lim ardor ordinarp- mold
p ba rot eleva per (M ortified fro ob struct fi ne.
t the subject props wCaopl Iebs eg4i~idesorliption feet at the C**rior bowAktin
i Property identification Rubsr
CM) . (F)Deed otiaw or private oovamntep if applicable. COA per:lal up.
at 1w- 20' -50' eking: The Site develoFme* plan, buildfagst •
amaess, eurface drainage, landzaRAM and utility servift.
•.: CCMKX VTA' 1 'K S:P BE - •YJ. :) 1 =IBM =Y
I to
ro*dxemmts for vadmwe procedures. Was
Submitted thk Zj�* of i
V A4 A. xt
Fee
WS Ma IS TD W FUM OM Iff
':11.:. .� l \V l• .•'O) Ill i•?I I.:L- Cr mum
NV♦ • /li Ml U iY I "r IG•1 1 . Cr ON=
of the MmLing • +. Icy: y -p,
D Da
TaTAL P.02
SURVEY PREPARED FOR,
CHARLES LACKEY
540? POINT FRT
PRIOR LA fM 553 CIRCLE
Valley Surveying Co., P.A.
SUITE 120.0 , 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE MINNESOT
TELEPHONE , (612) 44?- 2570 55372
PR10
"41&
�-�4%
LAKE
M .,6 e,
Ile's
Izemp4o
PM "f
9 3 W7.
rima KAMA - 954-740
Lot 20, rAIRLAWN SHORN. Scott Countr, "Lumenota and the emst 10.00 feet
of Eat 27, of "Ild plot. showing 011 vi•Lble improvements and encroschownts
on to and off from mald pcopwtjp it any. -
0 SO 60
SCALE IN Fier
IW
beceecork Ztevationt 910.00 call SA tie mil on Lot 29 " whom
on UN muzwor di:owlos.
92 Dometes, ex"IlAng Stud, olowatice
16= owder
-2: ="ce"
CHARLES LACKEY
540y FRosr PRIOR LAKE M CIRCL
N 55771
qw.
to 2 {'
PRIOR
N ". a KE
". _ !0],0
OW ARW, 0-661 COCK
ryry��bppb1rJO t6;be El6.6 c*Je:
r,u4j - 93fF1�
r'4J AecR. 994.74 ,
t 0t6.t1 40
3 Acsft • 9AS.'l4
DESCRIMON,
Wt 25, rAIRLtNN SNORES, SwLt Crony, Nlnnesolo and the Wast 10.01) feet
of Lot 27, of sold plot, sbsoLaf 011 visible 1 end 0Wae000MWats
on to and Off from sold progrti if W.
NOIIS•.
Mm mmet Elevetlanl 910.00 nal In tlo Wall s0 149 29 so ehaWa
m the socrq deeded.
924.3 Donates eeletlne 9[1de 024"U"
c
0 30 SO
SCALE W FEET ,
O O.Mw 1 wl N Im
Lk,wo NO Rme]
Ms. Deb Garross
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
RE: PROPOSED LACKEY G'ARIANCES, 5630 FAIRLAWN SHORES TRAIL, PRIOR
LAKE
Dear Ms. Ga oss:
I have received and reviewed the materials you sent regarding the
subject variance request.
The proposed house, along with existing garage and driveway are
quite a bit for the small, narrow lot. This is evidenced by the
request for four variances on the property.
on the other hand, an existing non- conformity (building below RFPE
and setback 0 from the 904.0' elevation) will be removed. This
would seem to be a fair trade for the variances requested. Any
reasonable means to reduce or minimize the variances requested
should be considered. Setback averaging with adjacent parcels
should also be looked at.
I note the lot is relatively steep. Appropriate erosion control
measures should be implemented and maintained throughout
construction.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely, -
S ►��- ✓-
Patrick J. ch
Area Hydrologist
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
"VA03PN"
You are hereby notified that a hearing will be held by the
Planning commission in the Prior Lake Council Chambers at 4629
Dakota Street S.E. on:
THURSDAY, MARCH 18, 1993 at 7:35 P.M.
PURPOSE OF HEARING: To consider a variance application for
Charles F. Lackey of 5207 Frost Point
Circle.
SUBJECT SITE LOCATION: Lot 28, Fairlawn Shores and the East 10
feet of Lot 27, Fairlawn Shores.
NOTICE OF HEARING
FOR
VARIANCE
5630 Fairlawn Shores Trail
REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant proposes to remove an
existing dwelling and construct a new
single family home as proposed on the
at` -ched survey. In order to construct
th proposed home, the following
variances are requested: 2.5' east side
yard variance from the 10' side ypard
setback requirement; 37' lake ore
variance from the 75' lakeshore setback
requirement; 103 lot coverage variance
from the 223 lot coverage requirement
and 13.53 impervious surface variance
from the 303 impervious surface
requirement.
If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should
attend this meeting. Oral and written comments will be accepted
by the Planning Commission. For more information, contact the
Prior Lake Planning Department at 447 -4230.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
DATE MAILED: March 11, 1993
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior lake, Minnesota 55372 I Ph. (612) 4474230 ! Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPO nUNRY 04WYER
March 17, 1993
8:30 A.M.
A telephone call was received from Mr. Bill Wellinger of 5650
Fairlawn Shores Trails voicing his objections to the variance
request of 2.5 foot east side yard variance from the 10 foot
setback requirement for 5630 Fairlawn Shores Trail.
Mr. Wellinger is in Texas and unable to be here at the meeting
and wanted his objections read into the record. He can be
reached at 210 - 964 -3246.
; ranc r I AXNFZ
',�fnr lPS. '.P( HIF( - I1
Nil. W1
'n 11!uI -.�. .i'F hclk Cll
DATE: 18 March 1993
TO: Prior -Lake Planning Commission & Staff
FROM: Philip Carlson, AICP: Dddgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc.
RE: Summary of Planning & Zoning Introductory Program
The following transcript contains the summary of the key points that are included in the slide
presentation on the history of planning and zoning standards. The information is presented in a
summary format. It is, of course, a written transcript of the slide presentations, so sonic imagination
is required.
IIISTO iC L OVERVIEW
The fist portion of the presentation searches human history to locate the beginnings of the use of the
police power by the government The police power is a shorthand, legal name for all of those powers
in government dealing with the regulation of private activities without payment of compensation in
return for these restrictions.
The search takes us back to Europe and Medieval times. Living conditions are abhorrent and human
densities, habitat, and public health problems all paint a dismal picture of the human condition. It is
the time of the Bubonic Plague.
We find the predecessors of modem zoning law in the first public health laws in England. Their
purpose was to separate structures to allow light and air circulation. Their justification (for restricting
the rights of land owners) was to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.
Program Summary Page 2
The historical Overview continues with a brief review of American history. We look at our Founding
Fathers (and Mothers) and the individual, to pursue life, liberty, and happiness, unimpeded by
governmental action. Those rights were among the important cornerstones for the United States
Constitution.
The United States Constitution established the following:
1. That the Federal Government be one of limited and expressly enumerated powers; and
2. It granted the general police power to State Governments, rather than the Federal
Government.
NOTE: Local govenunents' authority to plan and zone is delegated to them by the States
through State Enabling Legislation. The Constitution does not address local governmental
authority.
There are many Constitutional issues that are frequently raised in planning and zoning matters. They
include:
1. Procedural D ue. Process
No person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property without a fair hearing and the
opportunity to be heard and to defend against the proposed action.
2. Substantive Q.. Process
No person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property under circumstances that are
unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. This presents a major limitation to the use of the police
power.
"constitutes a taldng'; "no relationship to the objectives to be achieved'; "unreasonable"
No law may unduly favor one group over another and no law may impose a hostile
discrimination on any particular group.
"Reasonableness of the classification" -- the reasons for treating one use or group differently
than another.
"Rational basis" -- for the standards and restrictions must be found in the comprehensive plan.
Program Summary Page 3
LUSTORY OF CHANGING JUDICIAL AT=DES
Our historical review also considers the changing attitudes of the courts regarding local planning and
zoning matters over the years.
Pre -1916
Zoning was not widely used in the United States prior to the landmark Euclid vs. City of New York
case in 1916, which established the validity of zoning. Prior to that point communities had what were
referred to as nuisance laws that regulated objectionable and hazardous land uses. Decisions
regarding nuisance laws were seldom challenged and when they were, the courts usually sided with
the local government.
R e ,9,t(} Zoning Decisions
Between 1916 and the maid -1960s - early 1970s (depending upon which part of the country you
consider), the vast majority of local zoning decisions were upheld by the courts. There was a very
strong pattern of assumption of validity of local decisions.
Modem Judicial Rodew
Today, the courts are placing local zoning decisions under much closer scrutiny. When local decisions
are challenged in court, the court searches for the rational basis for the decision and the
reasonableness of the means to achieve the public purpose. Does the local decision represent a
reasonable means to a legal end?
LEGISLATIVE LJMITATIONS
State Planning nabling I aw
The authority to plan and zone is delegated to local government through state enabling legislation.
Such enabling statutes have almost always included some requirements for zoning to be "in
accordance with a comprehensive plan for the community". However, the actual tests for such
consistency were pretty loosely interpreted.
"METROPOI 7TAN LAND PLANNING ACT
The Metropolitan Land Planning Act mandates that all cities, counties, townships, school districts,
and other governmental agencies must prepare and adopt comprehensive plans. These plans must be
consistent with the regional plans prepared by the Metropolitan Council. The proposed amendment to
the state enabling law contemplates mandatory comprehensive planning for all cities, counties, and
townships.
Program Summary Page 4
m� PLANNYNG DEFINTf°fON
Community planning may be defined as a systematic, comprehensive, continuous, forward looking
process of analysis of a community's constraints for the purpose of formulating and implementing a
plan for the achievement of the goals and objectives of the community. (Paraphrased from Chapin,
Urban Y.and Use Planning
Er arty ENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The comprehensive plan consists of the following elements:
Inventory and Analysis
The plan should be based upon accurate and up- to-date information.
Goals and Objectives
Once the community has considered the information assembled in the inventory and analysis stage,
problems and opportunities can be analyzed and goals and objectives can be set for the planning
program-
Consideration of A1tMMOat_ives
When the goals and objectives have been adopted, a series of alternative plans and implementation
strategies are tested. The selected alternatives are refined and eventually become the component
plans that combine to form the comprehensive plan pand use plan, transportation plan, parks and
open space plan, sewer plan, etc.)
JMWementa6on Tools
Once the comprehensive plan is adopted, the process shifts into the implementation stage.
Implementation tools include the zoning ordinance subdivision regulations, building code, capital
improvements plan, and others. The purpose of each is to implement the comprehensive plan.
Therefore, there should be a reasonable tie between each of these tools and the comprehensive plan.
They should reflect the goals and objectives in the plan and be reasonable in light of the information
assembled in the inventory and analysis stage.
Role of the Comprehensive Plan
To accomplish the community's goals.
Role of the Zgning Ordin
To implement the comprehensive plan. Standards must meet the test of being reasonable means to a
legal end. There should be a clear trail back through the planning process to these standards.
Program Summary Page 5
ZONING TO PROTECT COMMUNITY AESTHETICS
Many communities are interested in zoning for aesthetics. One could substitute zoning to protect the
environment, or any of several other objectives, without changing the key points in this section.
A successful, basic planning program is a prerequisite to any effort to achieve more sophisticated
objectives (aggressive environmental protection measures, promote economic development,
redevelopment, etc.).
The following sections include a series of performance standards that are intended to address
common problems and to avoid aesthetic liabilities in the development of our communities. These
standards may be either too strict or too lenient for your community. The point is that if you want to
regulate these elements at all, they should be clearly addressed in your ordinance.
Exterior Building Materials
Certainly one of the most important elements in establishing the image of a building or an area is the
exterior building materials. It is also one of the most difficult steers to regulate and avoid a great deal
of subjectivity in adopted standards. The standard that is summarized below requires "permanent
finished" materials to avoid painted surfaces. It also offers the advantage of clearly stating what is
permitted and what is prohibited and those materials that may be acceptable if they are incorporated
into a design that meets or exceeds the quality set in the district.
All buildings shall be finished on all sides with permanent finished materials of consistent
quality . Exterior wall surfaces shall be face brick, glass, or stone architecturally treated
concrete, cast -in- place, pre-cast panels, or decorative block may be acceptable if incorporated
in a building design that is compatible with other development throughout the district. No
building shall be constructed of sheet aluminum, asbestos, iron, steel, or corrugated
aluminum
The image of even the most beautiful site can be marred by the appearance of an ugly accessory
structure or other site feature. The following standard avoids that problem.
All garages, accessory structures, screen walls, and exposed areas of retaining walls shall be
of a similar type, quality, and appearance as the principal structure.
Rooftop utilities are often an afterthought in the architectural design proem. This standard requires
that their screening be considered in the design process, prior to approval.
The ground level view of all rooftop utilities shall be completely screened from contiguous
properties and adjacent streets or designed to be compatible with the architectural treatment of
the principal structure.
F!
Program Summary Page 6
Loading and service areas must be completely screened, except at access points, from the
ground level view from contiguous properties and adjacent sheets.
This represent an excellent application of the use of the conditional use permit and provides the
community with the opportunity to attach reasonable conditions based on findings. Height of screen
wall is related to the situation of the subject property and adjacent sites.
There shall be no outdoor storage of either materials or products except through the issuance
of a conditional use permit.
This may be excessive in your minds, but if you do not have a standard for trash handling, you can
almost guarantee that you will have dumpsters floating around the parking lots.
All trash handling and trash handling equipment shall be stored within the principal building.
Such storage areas shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Fire Marshall's
office.
All patting areas and drives shall have poured -in -place concrete curbing.
This is an area where many communities have become very sophisticated. The standard below simply
establishes a minimum percentage of area within the site that must be landscaped and establishes
minimum sizes for the materials at teh time of planting.
At least 25 percent of the land area shall be landscaped with grass, approved ground cover,
shrubbery, and trees. Three percent of the surface area of land within a parking area shall be
landscaped.
The following minimum sizes shall be required at the time of planting:
Overstory, Deciduous Trees - 2 -1/2 inches
Small, Medium Ornamental Trees - 1 -1/2 inches
Coniferous Trees - 6 feet
Major Shrub Plantings - 5 gallons
Development plans within light industrial districts consistently come with about 15 percent
landscape area. tins would be a better standard for light industrial districts in that it provides
the requirement for high quality landscaping around the perimeter of developments, while
allowing the private sector to develop the property to its maximum potentiaL
Program Summary Page 7
Site_ Li¢h>itlg
Another frequent afterthought is site lighting. This standard ensures that the design for site lighting is
incorporated into the landscape planning Process.
Plans for site lighting shall be coordinated with the landscape plans for developments within
the subject area. Such lighting plans shall be designed to avoid any off -site glare from site
lighting and any unnecessary light trespass. Maximum fixture height shall be compatible with
the scale of the development and adjacent landscape features.
Ra
Mt s is another area when the ordinances and standards can become very complicated. Sign .
ordinances should be clear on permitted and prohibited signs. It pays to think that issues through
completely because if it is not prohibited, you will probably see it in your community.
If you choose to regulate signs, your ordinance should:
1. Establish a maximum percent of wall area that can be occupied by signage;
2. Location setbacks for pylon signs: and
3. Height and nwdrmun area for pylon signs.
I
0- MM
PLANNING ASSOCIATION
®, ANNUAL MEETING AND WORKSHOP
April 14, 1993
Willmar Holiday Inn and Convention Center
Citizens and Professionals Working Together For A Better Community.
Bob Graham, Past President
Minnesota Planning Association
221 East Clark Street '
Albert Lea MN 56007
a�cEiv��
• � 13o•a
DES GARROSS
'iTY OF r
1./AKC
ASST. CITY PLANNER
PR1GR
4579 DAKOTA ST. SE
PRIOR LAKE. MN 55372-
tA
01 01 b
C
m G
0
04 0 Mr. C
��
'O
O GnX
W
9 , a 3 N
N
0
0
y
E 0
0 ro OI0
`�
H ro
M E
C M m
t 0 O
X S
.~ E
' N X d
O aJ a'1
w
.,� O
E
41 w w .0 m
W
O
E do Id
3 : — 0
O
ic
f!2
G 41 O w❑ 41
os3e�4,
G m
o s
m m C C
c xr000
ro .y a
tua
N
ro..ro
a r c "
N z
m ro e ' u
6"mw
u. +'
4j
tC
ro C C
ro
°
�
♦1 01
u �w n
,°m41
a o
u a )
A.
u+'
ro
N
mj 7 0 a 0
W
IN I O .
Im N a
411 w
C
too
o1cr E at P.
+
01 s
m mot
-
C
a C a W O w 01
0 4
M O m 41
911 w
O C 9
L H 0
fL 4.4 0 CJ In 0
a Z
S M PLHNNIN® ASSOCIATION
UA
E PROGRAM
19oftiv,IFOO . &I
9:30 -10.30 Registration,
Coffee, Rolls, Networking.
10.30 -11:45 Minnesota
Planning Association Annual
Meeting. Election of
District Co- Directors,
Budget, By -Laws.
12:00 -12:45 Luncheon
12:45 -1:30 Speaker;
John Koester, on how the
planning commissioner as a
volunteer fits into the
community process.
1:30 -2:00 Networking Break
2:00 -3:30 Introduction and
Workshop on MPA's New
Planning Commissioners'
Training Manual. - "So
You're a Planning
Commissioner - Now What ? ? ?"
Coffee /Soft Drinks during
workshop.
The Minnesota Planning
Association has served
citizen and professional
planners since 1958.
"SO YOU'RE A PLANNING
COMMISSIONER -NOW WHAT ? ? ?"
The MPA has published a
training program
specifically for Planning
Commissioners. This
workshop will highlight
this.program and teach you
how to use it. Your
registration includes a
copy of "So You're a
Planning Commissioner - Now
What ? ? ? ".
WHY YOU ARE NEEDED
Learn how your role as a
planning commissioner and a
volunteer fits into the
community process and
structure.
John Koester will be
LOCATION informative and
entertaining and will give
Willmar Holiday Inn you some insight as to why
and Convention Center you subject yourself to
Willmar, MN. public praise and abuse.
JOHN KUESTER
A staff planner for the
Minnesota Project from
1984 -1992, John Koester
designed programs which
enabled groups of rural
towns to identify and carry
out joint community
development initiatives
such as,
..Common regional tourism
marketing strategies
..Homebased business
development efforts
..Community endowments
..Strategic Planning
..Rural leaders program
John was vice president of
the Central Minnesota
Initiative Fund and is a
member of the Rural
Initiatives Coalition
Board. He has a BA from
Drake University, an MA
from Southern Illinois
University, and has been an
instructor at St. Cloud
State University.
CO —HOSTS
City of Willmar
Mid- Minnesota Dev. Comm.
Br lf.. ... ,llomr
the Amcucan Farmland l rust (.AF I has published a xuri% char
:on dudes chat farmland more than pays !ts own .say in property'
eves. The rinal report, Does Frrmlard Proterrrort Pave is a ununair,
of three cost of cc mmunirv service studies +COCS) in A,�wam.
Deerfield and Gill in the Pioneer Valley along the Conneaiart
River in western Massachusetts. The studies provide evidence chat.
while private farm and open lands do not generate as much gross
income as do developed lands, their need for public services is so
minimal char their net effect on the tax base is a surplus.
"Although our research is not meant to show that growth
duesdr pay, it does suggest that development options are not
always neccisary for towns to ensure economic subilirv." sans Julia
Freedgood, author of the report. The northeastern office of AFT
was hired b the Massachusetts Department of Food and
Agriculture to conduct the study.
AFT developed the COCS technique because rural and
suburban fringe communities often lack the staff and financial
resources necessary to generace data to prose the relative value to the
community of diffcrene types of land uses, panicularly farmland.
The technique evolved from a 1986 report, Dno'rry Recited Public
Can n, in which AFT reorganized community records to determine
Elie net effect of each land use. Before the !Massachusetts studies,
COCS .rudies had been done in Dutchess County, New York.
in 1989, and in Hebron. Connecticut, in 1986.
The findings of COCS studies have been used to dispel
common claims that residential development increases local
propem tax income, that resource conservation is too expensive at
the local level, and that farmland does nor contribute signifi=civ
to the tax base and is therefore besr convened to a different use.
Methodology
The objective of a COCS study is to compare annual income and
expenses for tour different land uses. As the report stares. "they are
a snapshot in time of costs versus revenues per land parcel." Unlike
a fiscal impact analysis, a COCS study does not predict the impaa
of future land uses. "but rather gives public officials the benefit of
a took back at the effects of past actions."
The Massachusetts studies began with .AFT staff meeting with
local officials to set goals, explain the limits of the study, and
identuhv load sources of information. "Sponsors" from each
communiw were chosen, such as the mayor or planning director,
to provide oversight and support for each srudv.
Their first task was to idenrifv the basic land -use categories to
be analyzed. The towns of Deerfield and Agawam used residential.
commercial, industrial, and farm /open land. In Gill, however,
24 % Commercial/
Industrial
sponsors chose not an dillercntiate between commercial and
industrial lands.
The next step for the researchers was to obtain reliable revenue
and expense figures. All financial ¢cords for each town from a
recent, typical year (meaning one that was not a boom or bust
fnxrtcially) were reviewed for the calculations. Important data came
from the towns' annual reports and Tax Rate Recapitulation Forms,
sheers all Massachusetts towns and cities must submit to the static
oudining their projected revenues and appropriations to determine
local tax rates. The state Department of Revenue provided
information on state aid for education and transportation. This step
also involved extensive interviewing of local officials and service
providers.
Alloealing Rovanuos and Expenses
Afar the data were collected, the income and expenses on each
budget were reorganized to correspond with the assigned land -use
ategories. Discrepancies arose when deciding which types of lands
(and the resultant property tax income) should go into each land.
use category. For example, the state of Massachusetts considers
certain farm land in be commercial property. But, as Freedgood
acknowledges "the nature of [farm land] use and the type of services
it requires are more closely associated with open land than with
malls, motels, or movie theaters." Therefore, revenue generated by
Farm lands is included in the farm and open lands section, not the
commercial section, on the spreadsheet
Conversely, property raises from fans houses and housing for
farm workers was attributed to the residential category. Also, taxes
generated from rented homes were subtracted from commercial
and added to residential. As Freedgood explains. "This is because a
COCS study is concerned with who demands services, not the legal
status of the property. Whether residents are farmers living on the
land or renters leasing from an absentee landlord, they require the
same type of public services."
Other sources of income also had to be allocated on a land -use
basis. Seale aid to schools was considered a residential revenue.
Local receipts such as the motor vehicle tax, licenses, and permits,
were each apportioned by land use "as much as possible," says cite
report.
The researchers had an easier time categorizing revenues
according to land- use type than expenditures became tax records
include lot numbers, acres, property classification, and value. On
the contrary, non dam on expenditures was not kept according to
land use. Researchers had to rely on budget allocations,
departmental expense reports, other financial data, and extensive
interviews with service providers.
Expenditures were grouped in five classes: genet govemment,
public safety, education, human services, and public works.
Education and human services were considered residential expenses
bemuse they serve town residents directly. Building and tuning
department expenses were based on the number of permits and
inspections required for each land -use sector. The expenses of other
services, such as police and fire, were more difficult to allocate by
land use. Much of police and fire department annual budgets go to
inspections, public education, and safety, none of which was easy to
attribute to a specific use. Also, reviewing fire department records
helped determine where the calls came from but did not make dear
how much it cost to put each (ire out. Instead researchers had an
interview fire chiefs to determine how long it took to put each fire
out, how many fire fighters were called in, and how much
equipment was used A similar process was used to allocate police
departmem expenses. As the report states, "Domestic violence, for
example was charged to residential. Cows in the road went to farm
and open land."
Public works expenses, particularly highways, proved to
be the most difficult to allocase. In some instances there was
information available on the types of vehicles using the rinds
and the frequency of trips, but for the most part, local sponsors
were called upon to make estimations.
Finally, AFT researchers relied on the percentage of property tax
Deerfield Expenses
revenue paid by each sector as a guide to distributing revenues and
expenditures in cases where the sources were unclear. For example,
74.5 percent of property tax revenue in Agawam is from residential
uses, 15.6 from commercial, 8.2 percent from industrial, and 1.7
percent from farm and open land. Therefore a revenue like "free
cash," which consisted of leftover income from a previous year, was
divided up so the 74.5 percent was allocated to the residential
sector, 15.6 percent to commercial, and so on for industrial and
open lands.
Findings
The researchers found that farm and open lands "proved to be
respectable contributors to town income, and economical to serve
on a net basis." In fact, these lands were the least expensive to serve.
In Gill, for example, 12.2 percent of the rown's royal revenues came
from farm and open land, but only five percent of the town's
expenses were devoted to serving these areas. The findings were
similar in Deerfield, where 4.3 percent of total revenues were
attributable to farm and open lands, while just 1.4 percent of
expenditures went to service in these areas. Agawam followed the
same partern.
On the other hand, the study revealed char the cast of providing
services in residential areas ormismnty exceeded the income raised
by char sector in all three towns. In Agawam, the residential sector
accounted for 74.5 percent of property tax revenues and 81 percent
of all revenues. But it required 91 percent of expenditures. In
Deerfield residential revenues comprised 71.4 percent of the town's
total income, but 88.9 percent of total expenses. And in Gill, 69.9
percent of revenues came from the residential sector, but 86.6
percent of service costs went to residential areas.
In dollar- for -dollar terms, Deerfield spent $1.15 for services
in residential areas for every dollar generated in that sector. The
revenue/service ratio for residential services was similar in the
ocher towns. In contrast, public services for Farm and open land in
Deerfield cost 38 cents on the dollar. The aggregate ratios for the
three towns was $1.12 spent on public services for every dollar
raised by residential uses, compared with 33 cents in service rasa
for every dollar generated by farm and open lands.
whore It all Wes
The findings of the study are important to local oBcciak, planners,
and citizens of the Pioneer Valley for several reasons. The region
experienced unprecedented growth in the 1980s, which fueled a
huge increase in property values. The majority of this development
was low - density residential sprawl. Although the higher property
valuations resulted in higher assessments, the increased revenues
could not cover the increased cost of providing public services to
newly developed areas.
In contrast, the report points out that although farm and open
lands may have not raised considerable revenue, they were nor a
drain on the towns' resources. Freedgood says this pattern was so
consistent among each COCS study that it has led her "to question
some traditional assumptions, like what is meant by' highest and
best use.' Its a mistake to view prime farmland as open space just
waiting around to be developed." She believes that these findings
may help towns resist pressun: to develop simply to increase the
tax base, especially if the bulk of the development is residential.
Valley residents are also concerned about protecting the rural
character of the region and the effect rapid development has had on
their quality of life. Increased tragic congestion, pollution, noise,
and crime are all probable byproducts when a region becomes more
urban. Freedgood says a COOS Wady cut "extend the community
dialogue beyond the rase questions to consider viable economic
development rather than growth for the sake of growth."
The report also warns that, although commercial and industrial
senors were found to offset residential deficits, these sectors may
not always be "pore revenue generamrs." A study by the Vermont
League of Cities and Towns, The Tar Base aril the Tax Bilk Tar
Implications of Dmelvpmenr(1990), showed that property taxes
were highest in towns with the mosr commercial and industrial
development That study's audhon explain that commercial and
industrial development spars residential development, which in
cum drives up demand for public services. Those findings echo a
similar, although controversial, study done in DuPage County,
Illinois, in 1991 (sce Pub&Imwr t, September 1991).
The AFT report concludes with a discussion of the problems
and opportunities of fandand preservation in the Pioneer Valley.
Says Freedgood, "The real issue is not whether to develop, but
where and how and when to develop." Given that reality,
"communities need to decide what they want to be like in the
futtue and manage the pattern of development w achieve their
god"
Currently, most new development oars on farmland because
these properties are already cleared, flat, and drained To comterut
this, ormmunites an adopt zoning and land -use controls that
provide incentives ro protect productive farm land This could
include raising funds to purchase development rights, supporting
agricultural enterprise zones, and adopting subdivision controls
with density bonuses for dustered development The report
acknowledges that most small towns; and rural communities lade
the financial resources to do comprehensive planning. This problem
could hamper their ability to implement tinges in truing and
land -use policies.
Finally, communities must begin to view farmland protection
"as an investment in tut info smrrnue and an element of local
ecowmic development." In the 1980s in Massachusetts, Farms and
related businesses accounted for $16 billion of the $123 billion state
economy. Food processing plants alone generated $3.5 billion in
sales. The report encourages towns to evaluate the economic
benefice and amenities that Farm and open lands provide, beyond
the property rase contributions revealed in a COCS study. With
solid evidence that agriculture an be an economic development
engine, town leaders an gain support for financial incentives for
agriculture-based businesses, including grower cooperatives,
improved roadside stand Facilities, and new processing plants.
QUO Auk"
heimshm LOCOM O
WIMPLE
Glendale, Arizona a northwest suburb of Phoenix, has come up
with a unique way to hue industry. Glendale's economic
development department, in conjunction with die try's fire,
infrastructure, planning and zoning departments, loci ardhitem
and construction professionals, has developed a generic budding
specification and sire plan called SIMPLE — Strategic Industrial
Master Plan and Landscape Enterprise
SIMPLE is an adaptable 50,000 - square -four building, with
appropriate packing and landscaping. The building is designed for
80 percent plant operations and 20 percent office space and it is
tailored m fir in any of Glendale's three industrial parks.
The major selling point of the SIMPLE program is that it
expedites development review and the permitting process, which
saves time for both developers and the Glendale city staff.
Glendale's administration costs for site plan review and permitting
are also reduced.
Glendale's Economic Development Director, Jim Devine, says
that up to 11 weeks can be eliminated from a developer's
preconstmction phase. "This is our way ro respond to the
marketplace. The way we saw it time is money, and this was a way
to save bon," The program completely acts out the usual six weeks
allotted for design development. This enables the developer m begin
assembling and processing construction documents directly after the
conceptual planning and pre - application meeting with Glendale's
dry staff. It also reduces the construction plan review and
permitting phase from the typical six weeks m four weeks, because
the bulk of me construction documents have been pre - approved. In
addition, SIMPLE allows developer's a three. week head start on
grading and site preparation.
In developing the SIMPLE program, Glendale dry staff
essentially played the role of a prospective firm. Working with lot
contractors, they created a prototypical building specification that
would satisfy a variety of industrial uses. They came up with three
versions of a 50,000 - square -foot sire plan that would meet the city's
own zoning, building codes, and landscaping requirements. Then
they built in flexibility for each that would enable expansion up to
80,000 square feet. Each of the three plans allows for one- or two-
story configurations. In terms of cost, the designs all range between
$29 -$31 per square foot. The pre- approved plans are complete with
parking location and number of spaces. Also, building elevations,
interior specifications (such as carpet allowances and cooling
methods), loading requirements, traffic generation, and emergency
services have all been accounted for.
Because of Arizona s dry dienare, special landscaping
considerations have been built into SIMPLE. Each sire plan indudes
a landscape plan incorporating drought - tolerant design, using a
selection of central Arizona basin indigenous plants that need little
water. Sire landscaping is 31 percent of the total site area.
The SIMPLE program came on line in July 1992, and it has
already drawn its first firm. Allied Color Industries is building a
21,000 - square -foot facility in the Glen- Harbor Business Park,
and is planting to expand to 40,000 square feet over the next
three years. The SIMPLE sire plan needed some modifications to
accommodate Allied's growth needs. Allied considered locations in
Phoenix, Nevada, and Texas but chose Glendale for its low land
costs and its aggressive effort to accommodate their plant. Joseph
Majewski, Allied's manager of operation, told The BurineuJournal
that "m go from architecture to occupancy in 11 months is really
something." Two other firms are currently going through the
SIMPLE process.
The PAS Memo is a monthly publication for subscribers to the Planning Advisory
Service, a subwripvion .arch service of the American Planning Association:
Israel Smllman. Eacc,srive Director. Frank S. So, Deputy Esecuswr Director; William
R Mo.. Director of Research and Education..
The PAS Memo is produced by APA staff in Chicago. Research and venting by Reanrch
Department sraff. Mary. Morris. Editor. Production by Publications Department staff:
Cynthia Chedd, Asnaunt Editor: Dennis McClendon. Design Director.
Copyright 01993 by American Planning Association. 1313 E. 60th St.,
Chicago. IL 60637. The American Planning Assocwtnt has headquarmrs
offices at 1776 Mauach erns Ave.. N.W.. Washington. DC 20036.
All rights r rued. No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilised in any
form or by m . cacti. electronic or mechanic 1, including photocopying, recording,
or by any infnrm.don seorage said renieod sysmm, without permission in writing
from the Ammon Planning Aesesi.n...
Printed on recycled paper, including 50- 70 %se.led fiber
and 10% posmonsumer waste.
Since SIMPLE's inception, Devine says, he has received more
than 100 inquiries from prospective firms. He adds: "Local brokers
have really responded well to the concept because it is an excellent
selling point for them." Michelle Gregoy
Colorado Voters
Approve Tax Limit
Colorado voters have jumped on the anti-tax bandwagon. In
November, they approved a measure that requires voter approval
for all tax increases —from die state income tax to a school district's
millage levy —and puts a cap on all government spending. Local
governments can spend only what they did in the previous year,
with a slight adjustment for inflation and population growth.
In the months since the measure passed, each level of
government has been grappling with what effect it will have on
their ability to plan and budget. The spending limit has caused
particular problems. The law ties the allowable spending increase to
the Denver /Boulder consumer price index and to population
growth. The CPI figure was not available until February, although
most 1993 local government budgets had to be completed by
December 31. This forced local budget ofliEers to guess about the
inflation rate (most used a figure ranging from 3 to 3.5 percent).
They are expecting to make bi dget adjustments once the actual
CPI figures are known. Fhur cmom, most cities and towns are not
counting on population growth to increase their allowable spending
this year either.
Federal grants have been determined to be exempt from the
spending cap. Bur other revenue sources that vary from year to year,
such as lottery revenues (which cities are required to spend on open
space and recreational ftcilities), are nor. Therefore, "if a city's
lottery revenue increases from $20,000 to $30,000, $10,000 must
be cut from another program m keep the city under the spending
cap," says Berreri Weaver, planning director in Clear Creek County.
This could put a city in the "position of saying, yes. I do want to
build bike trails, but not at the expense of the Women, Infants and
Children program; he adds.
The spending limit will also hamper the ability of cities and
towns to put together multiyear finandal packages to attract large
employers. At the state level, the tourism board is at particular risk
Its has been financed by the legislature with a tax that expires every
five years. The tourism board's money nuns out this July, but the
general election that could approve its funding is not until
November, and Amendment One prohibits any special elections to
decide tax increases.
"Amendment One assumes that there is still a lot of fat to cut in
government budgets. In many cases, there isn't. The truth is, we've
been cutting back for years," says Waver. His department is
rethinking the way it provides all public services, with an eye
towards minimizing costs. Privatization, department
reorganizations, and charging impact fees are several ideas currently
on the table.
To cope with the limits, "counties are considering turning back
some mandatory programs —i aduding social services and weBare --
to me state," rays Kay Mariea, communications coordinator for the
Colorado Municipal Lague. Maria says that cities are also looking
at cutting nonessential services. Generally, that means anything bur
police and fire services, may be subject to curs. Marva Morns