HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 05 1991 Planning Commission agenda packetD cceme�K
0 pR`ok HERITAGE COMMUNITY TNIX -CV-4
7 189I 1991 2oy>
T.
P
r
DECEMBER 5, 1991
7:30 P.M.
CALL 70 ORDER
7:30 P.M.
REVIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
* 7:30 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARING 2000 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STAFF
AMEN1METf -17 RD 18 PHASES
8:00 P.M.
HEARING VARIANCE AMENDMENT WADE ALLISON
8:15 P.M.
HEARING VARIANCE DAVID NHBF.NZEN
* Indicates a Public Hearing
All times stated on the Planning Commission Agenda, with the exception of Public
Hearings, are approximate and may start later than the scheduled time.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior lake, Minnesota 55372 1 Ph. (612) 447 -4230 I Fax (612) 447 -4245
0 P
:J
;ter,. \ t:5 n�/
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY 9
1991 2091
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 7, 1991
The November 7, 1991, Planning Commission Meeting was called to
order by Chairman Loftus at 7:30 P.M. Those present were
Commissioners Loftus, Arnold, Kedrowski, Roseth, Assistant City
Planner Deb Garross, and Associate Planner Sam Lucast.
Commissioner Wells was absent.
ITEM I - REVIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
A correction was made to the minutes under ITEM I, second
paragragh, line one, to delete Commissioner Arnold's name in the
vote taken, as he was not present for the October 17, 1991,
meeting.
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS
AMENDED.
Vote taken signified ayes by Kedrowski, Loftus, Arnold, and
Roseth. Commissioner Arnold abstained. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM II- SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY - PARKING LOT SITE
PLAN REVIEW
Bill Rudnicki, Consulting Engineer for the Sioux Community, gave
the presentation. Mr. Rudnicki stated that the Sioux Community
has purchased approximately 40 acres, formerly the O'Laughlin
property which is west of the reservation. The intent is to
.install a temporary parking lot. Due to the growth of the gaming
industry, parking problems are being experie..zed. The parking
lot would match existing grades, erosion control would be
implemented and a 3:1 slope would be maintained. The parking lot
would be removed after the new facility is operational.
Deb Garross presented the information as per planning report of
November 7, 1991. The application from the Mdewakanton Sioux
Community is to construct a temporary 304 car parking lot. The
parking lot is located in the A -1 Agricultural Zoning District.
The Planning Commission does have the authority to grant a
variance from the requirements of the Ordinance, as outlined in
Section 7.6 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Staff's recommendation is to approve the variance since it would
improve a currently unsafe situation and would not be detrimental
to the abutting property owners nor to the public at large and is
consistent with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 7, 1991 PAGE 2
Comments from the Commissioners were on: lighting, grading, close
proximity to the Bingo Hall, possibility of parking lot becoming
permanent, and annexation of subject property into Sioux
Community.
MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI, TO GRANT APPROVAL OF THE
PARKING LOT TO THE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY TO CONSTRUCT A 304
CAR TEMPORARY PARKING LOT ON NW1 /4 OF SW1 /4 OF SECTION 28,
TOWNSHIP 115N, RANGE 22 W. RATIONALE BEING THE CONSTRUCTION WOULD
IMPROVE AN UNSAFE CONDITION, REASONABLE DEVIATION OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE. THE LAND WILL BECOME TRUST LAND WITHIN 4 -8 MONTHS AND
AS SUCH WILL NO LONGER BE SUBJECT TO PRIOR LAKE ORDINANCES, AND
WOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE
COMMUNITY.
Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Kedrowski, Roseth, and
Loftus. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM III PAT O'KEEFE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Pat O'Keefe, 15191 Fairlawn Shores Trail SE, stated he is
requesting a conditional use permit to construct a two family
dwelling. The design of the house is unique as it does not
resemble the typical duplex style. The applicant will be living
in the upper level and his parents would live in the lower
walk -out level.
Sam Lucast presented the information as per planning report of
November 7, 1991. The subject site is located in two different
zones. The southern portion is C -1 Conservation and the northern
portion is R -1 Urban Residential. When a parcel is divided by
two zones, the Ordinance allows it to be used for any use within
50 feet of the division. Duplexes are allowed as Conditional
Uses in the R -1 Zoning District. The applicant has designed the
house plans to compliment the site and is not the normal
appearance of a duplex. The unit will be owner occupied. Staff
recommends approval of the application with conditions.
Robert Preussler, 16350 Park Ave. asked for clarification of the
location of the proposed duplex.
Margaret Busse, 4350 Dakota St. questioned the duplex and stated
that she would like to see one home built on the lot.
Corinne Gormley, 16048 West Ave. had questions on the building
envelope in reference to the 30 foot setback.
Rich Rybeck, 16no0 Sunfish Trail, asked for clarification on the
location of the conservation district boundary and owner
occupied status for future owners.
Patrick O'Keefe, 15191 Fairlawn Shores Trail, stated he is
co -owner with his parents, and that the plan is designed so that
the duplex can be converted to a single family unit, he also
questioned recommended staff restriction on house value.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 7, 1991 PAGE 3
Comments from the Commissioners were on: driveway location and
turn around on driveways, owner living quarters, house
valuation, landscape plan, impressive plans, lighting plans,
and off - street parking for four vehicles.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR 1/2 ACRE LOT MW OF COUNTY ROAD 21 AND WEST AVENUE,
AS IT EXCEEDS THE MINIMUM SIZE LOT REQUIREMENT OF 15,000 SQUARE
FEET, IS LOCATED BETWEEN R -1 AND R -3 ZONES THUS ALLOWING A
TRANSITION AREA ON THIS PARCEL, THE SITE IS WOODED ON ALL SIDES
AND SERVES AS A BUFFER TO ROADS AND ADJACENT HOMES, THE DUPLEX AS
PROPOSED IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE RECOMMENDED:
1. THE DUPLEX MUST BE OWNER OCCUPIED.
2. A PARKING PLAN BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF TO INCLUDE A TURNAROUND
FOR BOTH DRIVEWAYS, 90 DEGREE ANGLE EXITS, AND STAFF REVIEW
DRIVEWAY RELATIVE TO DAKOTA STREET.
3. BUILDING VALUE SHOULD BE ABOVE THE AVERAGE VALUE OF HOMES IN
THE AREA.
4. LANDSCAPING PLAN BE SUBMITTED WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT TO BE
REVIEWED BY STAFF.
5. THE PLAT PLAN AND BUILDING ELEVATIONS SHALL BE AN EXHIBIT AND
BUILDING PLANS SHALL BE SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH THE
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL.
Vote taken signified ayes, by Kedrowski, Roseth, Arnold, and
Loftus. MOTION CARRIED.
Recess called at 9:20 P.M. Meeting reconvened at 9:25 P.M.
Discussion followed on the DeVos site line study made by Bruce
Loney, Assistant City Engineer, stating that the sight distance
problem is caused by the slope of Mr. Caruso's driveway, the
vertical curve of Lakeside Avenue, and a utility box adjacent to
the north of the Caruso driveway, and not the location of the
DeVoss home. The Commissioners accepted the letter. Russell
DeVoss, Roy Clay and Jay Caruso were notified of this decision.
Comprehensive Plan Workshop is scheduled for January 25, 1992.
Additional information will be sent later.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Kedrowski, Loftus, Ar,iold, and
Roseth. MOTION CARRIED.
Meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. Tape of meeting on file at City
Hall.
Deb Garross Sam Lucast
Assistant City Planner Acting Recording Secretary
IT HERITAGE COMMUNY 9
1841 1991
20291
U PR, 1,1,
"CP02PC"
PLANNING REPORT
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
PRESENTER:
HORST GRASER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
PUBLIC HEARING:
X YES NO
DATE:
DECEMBER 5, 1991
HISTORY / BACKGROUND
The purpose of this public hearing is to consider the addition of
several policies to the transportation component of the Year 2000
Comprehensive Plan. Attached to this memo find a copy of the
existing transportation plan. Proposed language is illustrated
by upper case letters and 3s underscored. City Manager, David
Unmacht will be making a formal presentation to the Planning
Commission to provide background information and to describe the
proposed amendment.
The City has been involved with the Metropolitan Council for
several months in order to resolve outstanding issues relative to
the Bloomington Ferry Bridge and interchange. In short, the
Metropolitan Council believes that the interchange which would
allow Prior Lake citizens direct access to the new bridge
crossing, is inconsistent with their MDIF Metropolitan
Development Investment Framework. The Met Council is concerned
that the interchange is located in the rural service area and
that there will be premature development pressure on adjacent
lands if the interchange is constructed. The City's of Shakopee
and Prior Lake have worked diligently with the Met Council for
several months in order to resolve their concerns. The attached
document and proposed amendments have been written in order to
mitigate the concerns of the Met Council.
The Metropolitan Council has indicated that the interchange could
be approved provided the City prohibit additional direct land
access to C.R. 18, prohibit additional roadway intersections to
C.R. 18 and restrict development of access highways to the C.R.
18 and the Shakopee Bypass. The proposed amendments set forth
the language and policies to meet the aforementioned intent. The
Met Council wants to protect its metropolitan investment and
requires the City's of Prior Lake and Shakopee to amend their
comprehensive plans in order to do so.
A formal presentation with background information will be
provided at the public hearing from David Unmacht and Horst
Graser. The recommendation from staff is to approve the
amendments as proposed and forward that recommendation to the
City Council.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax 61214474245
"CP02P1" TRANSPORTATION
November 26, 1991
Thoroughfares
Prior Lake's proposed thoroughfare plan reflects the constraints
of the Metropolitan Systems Statement and the functional system
of the Scott County Transportation Plan. This plan accepts
essentially the functional classification system as proposed by
the two above mentioned jurisdictions. The Metropolitan System
Statement calls for a plan consistent with Prior Lake's
classification in the development framework. ACCORDING TO THE
mesota River. A transportation network will be
emphasizes north -south transportation routes.
The 1973 Comprehensive Plan contained an aggressively
expansionist bias consistent with the successful campaign to
secure the Metropolitan Sewer Interceptor from Blue Lake
Treatment Plant. The plan suggests a community of up to 30,000
people supported by an extensive industrial and commercial base.
The transportation system recommended was sufficiently ample to
link Prior Lake with the surrounding region as well as to provide
for internal circulation. With minor variation, it was
consistent with the Scott County 1985 Plan which also indicated
large scale urban development within the City. The population
projections currently in use suggest more modest development and
along with it, the need for fewer major streets.
The Metropolitan Systems Statement for Prior Lake indicates a
need for minor arterials and collector streets rather than the
more elaborate system ideitified in the former Comprehensive
Plan. By definition, minor arterials provide medium to short
trip service between subregions and activity centers within
subregions at moderate to lower speeds. They provide access to
principal and intermediate arterials, other minor arterials and
collectors and maintain restricted direct access. Collectors
provide collector and distribution service at low speeds between
neighborhoods and major non - residential land use. They provide
access to minor arterials, other collectors, local streets and
adjoining land. Three minor arterials serving the traditional
streets and adjoining land. Three minor arterials serving the
traditional center of Prior Lake include S.T.H. 13, C.S.A.H. 21
and C.S.A.H. 23. The north and west edges of the community are
served by C.S.A.H. 42 and C.S.A.H. 17 respectively. Collectors
serving central Prior Lake are Franklin Trail, C.S.A.H. 44 and
Pleasant - West Streets which connect with C.S.A.H. 21 and C.R.
83 north of the lakes. The west side of the City will be served
by C.S.A.H. 12.
It appears that there may be some need to shift the emphasis of
certain county roads as well as to add several miles of collector
streets. one basic community transportation need is the
development of continuity between collector streets within
developing neighborhoods. Prior Lake transportation services
have suffered since few neighborhoods are provided with access
other than FROM S.T.H. 13.
The existing transportation system in Northern Scott County is a
result of a combination of decisions made in both public and
private sectors over a period of several decades. _PRIOR _ LARE IS
4 i
n�
I
Freestanding Grovth Centers
POLICIES
43. Emphasize the living /working /shopping opportunities
within Freestanding Growth Centers by providing good
internal transit service as warranted by these
activities.
A review of regional goals and policies may be helpful in
developing a transportation system for Prior Lake. Because it is
a freestanding growth center in the rural service area,
transportation policies 43 through 46 must be emphasized as
follows:
44. Ensure accessibility to the urbanized area by:
a. providing scheduled public transit or para- transit
service between the freestanding cities and the
nearest major center or Metro Center;
b. encouraging car pools, van pools, subscription bus,
etc. especially for work trips;
C. emphasizing public expenditures for metropolitan
highways on safety and operational improvements,
rather than increased capacity.
Rural Service Area
POLICIES
45. Highways that interconnect the Metropolitan Area with
outstate communities may be improved to accommodate
projected intrastate travel but access should only be
provided to Freestanding Growth Centers and Rural Town
Centers.
46. The rural roadway system should be planned and designed
with primary emphasis upon the transporting of rural
products to the urban market and the delivery of goods
and services to the farming communities.
The Functional Classification System prepared for Prior Lake as
part of the Metropolitan Systems Statement parallels the 1973
Thoroughfare Plans with specific exceptions:
- The systems statement does not show Highway 13 rerouted west
of Spring Lake.
- The systems statement shows County Road 21 as a collector
rather than as a secondary arterial.
- The systems statement indicates that both Spring Lake Road
and 170th Street are collectors rather than arterials.
The existing Scott County Thoroughfare Plan includes the
following proposals:
- Replacement of the Savage Railroad Bridge by a new facility
constructed as an extension of County Road 27.
- construction of a Shakopee By -Pass.
- Upgrading and extending County State Aid Highway 42 to
connect with Truck Highway 41 at U.S. 169 as part of an
"outer ring freeway" for the metropolitan area.
- Relocation of Trunk Highway 13 from its present location to
the west side of Spring Lake.
3
- Creation of three north -south arterials in addition to Trunk
Highway 13.
Extending and straightening the alignment of County Road
89 between Highway 101 and C.S.A.H. 42.
b. Extending C.S.A.H. 21 northward from C.S.A.H. 42 to the
east of Dean Lake to Highway 101.
Rerouting C.S.A.H. 12 along the railroad right -of -way
and connecting directly with C.S.A.H. 21.
Implementation of the above proposals has been minor since their
origination by the County in 1972. Some of the significant
actions and /or proposals made since the Comprehensive Plan
include:
- Savage Railroad Bridge was closed in January of 1977.
- Bloomington Ferry Bridge was reopened with a temporary
replacement in January of 1978.
- U.S. Highway 169 and Trunk Highway 101 Minnesota River
crossing was improved in 1977 without an increase in
traffic lanes.
- County State Aid Highway 42 between County State Aid Highway
27 and the County line has been improved and lanes
increased from two to four.
- A County Road 41 Bridge and a Trunk Highway 169 Bridge have
been recommended for construction and an Environmental
Impact Statement is being prepared.
As early as the 1950's work began on ways to forecast the
transportation needs of the Metropolitan Area. The methodologies
explored resulted in a series of travel model utilizing
computers. The traffic assignment zones created for this purpose
continue to be used as more detailed information becomes
available. Prior Lake has five traffic assignment zones which it
shares with adjoining municipalities including one which is
divided by the lake of Prior Lake. TAZ's 981 and 982 are shared
with Shakopee, TAZ 985 is shared with Savage and TAZ's 989 and
990 are shared with Spring Lake Township. The core data sets
provided by the transportation staff of the Metropolitan Council
include household, population and employment data for each
traffic assignment zone. The Prior Lake portion of each TAZ is
tabulated below based upon population projections outlined in the
Land Use Plan. It is clear that TAZ 982 will continue to be the
center of Prior Lake activity by the year 2000. It is expected
to contain 601 of the City population and 801 of the employment.
Following the year 2000, TAZ's 989 and 990 will expand in
population and TAZ 982A will expand in employment. The
population growth will be encouraged in the orderly annexation
area of Spring Lake Township and employment opportunities will be
provided as the industrial land reserve at the intersection of
County Roads 21 and 42 begins the process of development. The
plan for thoroughfares reflect both the data forecasts for the
Prior Lake portion of the Traffic Assignment Zones and
anticipated development activity beyond the year 2000. The are
influenced strongly by the Scott County Comprehensive Plan which
emphasizes certain rights -of -way more strongly than does the
Functional Classification System in the Prior Lake Systems
Statement. The latter, for example, contains no intermediate
Arterials, and certainly no indication that Trunk Highway 13
ultimately should be removed from the urban cluster south and
east of Prior Lake. In this plan, certain collectors have been
added where none were previously indicated.
Expected Households, Population and
Employment by 2000
within Prior Lake Traffic Assignment Zones
TAZ Households Population
Employment
981 70 200
0
982A 1,170 3,500
150
9828 2,430 7,300
700
985 500 1,500
50
989 270 800
50
990 830 2,500
50
TOTALS 5,270 15,800
1,000
Traffic Volumes - Minor Arterials
1978 ADT 2000 ADT
County 42
County 17 - County 21
1500
2400
County 21 - Crest Avenue
2150
3900
Crest Avenue - Lois Avenue
2600
6000
Lois Avenue - Highway 13
3600
7000
County 17
County 42 - County 282
1850
3000
County 282 - Highway 13
950
1600
State Highway 13
County 282 - County 81
4100
6600
County 81 - 170th Street
5000
8000
170th Street - County 23
7900
12700
County 23 - County 12
9900
15900
County 12 - County 44
10300
16500
County 44 - Boudin Street
11200
18000
Boudin Street - County 42
9700
15600
County 23
Highway 13 - County 8 2450 4000
County 21
County 42 - County 83 1150 1900
County 83 - West Avenue 1850 3000
West Avenue 2200 3600
Colorado Street - Highway 13 3600 5800
County 12
Highway 13 - County 27 3300
• Approximates an annual increase of 33
Functional Classification Svstem
The system of thoroughfares in Prior Lake is comprised of three
types of facilities. The following describes the function and
characteristics of each.
A. Minor Arterials - They are designed to accommodate medium to
short trips at moderate speeds. They also connect
neighborhoods, subregions, and activity centers within the
urban area. Access is limited to other arterials and
collectors. Direct land access to minor arterials is
limited; however, they are suitable for local transit trips.
B. Collectors - These streets collect and distribute traffic to
the arterial system generally at low speeds. They connect
neighborhoods within and between subregions. Access includes
minor arterials, other collectors, local streets, and direct
land access. They are also designated for local transit
trips.
C. Local Streets - They are designated to accommodate short
trips at low speeds. They collect and distribute traffic by
connecting blocks within neighborhoods and specific
activities within other land use areas. Access includes
collectors, other local streets and direct land access.
Minor arterials include a proposed rerouting of Trunk Highway 13
in a north -south orientation to the west of Spring Lake, existing
Trunk Highway 13, County Road 12/21 and County Road 23. The
rerouting of Trunk Bighway 13, which would be accomplished by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation, is not likely to take
place until after the year 2000. Projected traffic volumes from
the south are not anticipated to greatly increase during the next
20 years, whereas local traffic will increase to the point of
significantly slowing through traffic with the addition of
additional traffic control devices. Long Range relief can be
achieved by utilizing existing rights -of -way of County 17 and 83
northwest of Spring Lake. In the long range view, this road will
become a second link between Prior lake and urban development in
the Twin Cities by way of the proposed Minnesota River crossing
in Shakopee. A more immediate connection will be available on
County 42 as improvements are extended westward by Scott County.
Additional right -of -way and increased traffic lanes are already
being utilized within the City of Savage. Similar improvements
within Prior Lake will link the entire community with the Twin
Cities by means of Interstate 35 at Burnsville Center. A four
lane facility is anticipated for both of these minor arterials.
The remaining minor arterials will be two lane facilities to be
constructed and maintained by Scott County. Existing Trunk
Highway 13 would be added to the County Road System as an
exchange for the county roads that will provide the future
alignment for relocated Trunk Highway 13. Another significant
change in the system of minor arterials is the proposal for
County Road 21 to approximate the right -of -way of the abandoned
railroad, connecting directly with County Road 12 at the Trunk
Highway 13 intersection. Because space for this road is limited
within the downtown, all future development will be required to
observe a set back of 60 from its center line.
A. Minor Arterials
1. County Road 42 - County Road 42 is a paved two lane
highway scheduled to become a four lane divided highway
on a 120 foot wide right -of -way. The right -of -way width
will provide space for a raised median and turn slots.
It is the only direct east -west thoroughfare which
traverses the City. No direct access to or from single
family lots will be permitted. Intersections with local
roads will be permitted. Intersections with local roads
will be controlled by cross - street stop signs.
Intersections with other minor arterials will be
signalized.
2. Proposed Highway 13 By -Pass - The proposed by -pass is a
long range thoroughfare which will approximate the
alignments of collectors County 17 i 83 plus four miles
of new right -of -way in the area which separates them.
It will be a four lane divided highway on a 120 foot
right -of -way. Currently County 17 is a two lane paved
road whereas County 83 is two lanes but not paved.
Direct land access will be limited and no direct access
will be permitted from single family use. Intersections
with other minor arterials will be signalized and both
local and collector streets shall include stop signs at
intersections.
3. Existing Highway 13 - Currently Highway 13 is a two lane
paved thoroughfare which includes direct access control
and signalized intersections for the two major business
districts. It is the primary spine connecting all
existing development in Prior Lake. Traffic volumes are
projected to increase by three percent per year over the
next 20 years. At some point beyond the year 2000,
through traffic will be directed to the west and north
Of the lakes. Continued access limitation and
signalized intersections for other minor arterials will
be mandatory. It will remain a two lane facility.
4. County 12 and 21 - The existing two lane paving does not
directly connect and provides no limits on access.
Future improvements will feature a direct linking of
these routes through the Central Neighborhood along the
abandoned railroad right -of -way. An 80 foot wide
right -of -way will be necessary to add frontage lanes
through existing development and a separate lane for
bicycle trails. A11 access shall be controlled
utilizing cross - street stops and traffic signals at
intersections with other minor arterials.
5.
County 23 - An existing two lane paved thoroughfare
providing access to the south with very limited
increases in traffic anticipated. Access limitations
are not anticipated.
B. collector Streets
Collector Streets are designed to collect traffic from local
streets and direct it to the arterial street system.
Collectors will be designed to include 80 foot rights -of -way
with 44 feet devoted to paving. Direct land access is
possible but local street intersections will be spaced to
minimize the number of four -way stops.
1. Franklin Trail
2. 160th Street
3. 170th Street - County Road 81 - Northwood Road
4. Duluth Avenue
5. Crest Avenue - South of County Road 42
6. County 83
7. County 17
Some additions to the Functional Classification System
involve Northwood Road, Crest Avenue south of County 42 and
Duluth Avenue. The addition of Duluth Avenue recognizes an
existing pattern which will become more extensively used as
development moves north of the lakes. The linking of 170th
Street and Northwood Road is intended to remove through
traffic from Spring Lake Park and to connect the west
neighborhoods within the proposed urban districts. Similarly
the Crest Avenue connection to County Road 21 will provide
access between the two north neighborhoods and the proposed
industrial land reserve.
Local Streets
Local Streets collect and distribute traffic between
developed land and the system of collectors and arterials.
They provide access to the properties which abut them. Local
Street design is carefully reviewed by the Staff, Planning
Commission and City Council to determine compliance with the
City Subdivision Regulations.
Transportation improvements to be undertaken by Prior Lake
during the next five years include one collector and three
local streets. Improvement cost for the collector will be
shared between the developer of the adjoining subdivision and
the assignment of gas tax revenues. One of the local streets
will be paid entirely through assessments while the other two
will be financed partially through assessments and the rest
through the general fund. The relative proportion of shared
cost is calculated for each project.
Proposed Transportation Improvements 1980 - 84
Cost
Year
Type
Facility
From
To
170,000
1980
Collector
Crest Ave
C.R. 42
S.P. Beach
60,000
1981
Local
Vine St
STH 13
Tower
40,000
1981
Local
Walker St
Dakota
Pleasant
30,000
1982
Local
Pleasant Ave
Main
STH 13
Pedestrian and Bicycle System
Pedestrian links are recommended along the abandoned railroad
right -of -way. There may be some crowding of pedestrian space
close to the central business area, since the minor arterial
comprised of County Roads 12 and 21 will utilize the same
alignment. It is possible to accommodate both since they serve
different community functions. The pedestrian transportation
proposal should encourage more walking and the use of bicycles.
Several community facilities including the downtown, Lakefront
Park and both industrial areas, are located along this proposed
path. Other pedestrian and bike paths are recommended along the
entire major street system. The collector and arterial trails
connect all areas of the City and are conveniently located to
provide suitable alternatives to travel by automobile.
Mass Transit
According to the Transportation System Management Plan, it would
be feasible to build lane capacity to handle peak -hour travel by
cars. Mass transit is an alternative which diverts the auto
driver into a passenger. Prior Lake is a Free Standing Growth
Center with recommended policies emphasizing the
living /working /shopping opportunities within the City, augmented
by scheduled public transit between free standing cities and
nearby major centers and encouraging car pools and van pools for
work trips. Mass transit service to Prior Lake before 1990 is
not a high priority item and no fixed transit facilities are
planned.
10
Prior Lake is presently being served by a MTC bus route with
trips once each morning and evening. However, the rider
participation is improving with more and more people making use
of the service daily. A major complaint by interested riders is
that the bus route does not correspond with major job centers.
In 1977, the MTC erected the first passenger shelter adjoining
Brooksville Shopping Center. A second shelter was established at
Dakota Street and Highway 13 in 1979. Analyzing metres mass
transit policies with respect to Prior Lake, reveals several
important factors. First, Prior Lake has few jobs which forces
people to commute. It is then evident that the transportation
habits of Prior Lake residents must change in the future. The
City will encourage this change by providing parking areas for
car pooling and van pooling. In addition, alternate passenger
shelter sites with adequate parking facilities need to be
provided. without this activity, Prior Lake's dependence on the
auto could restrain future growth as energy becomes scarce and
expensive.
The geographic location and size of Prior Lake could possibly be
an economic deterrent for local or private mass transit systems.
Prior Lake's population is relatively sparse lacking both
concentrations of people and shopping areas. Local mass transit
could become a reality if conditions forced people to work and
shop within the City. The City will incorporate facilities for
public transit in the design of neighborhood commercial and
industrial developments. Major activity centers will be
connected with residential neighborhoods by safe pedestrian and
bicycle paths.
Aviation
Prior Lake is classified as a seaplane lake and currently two
planes utilize the lake throughout the summer. Because
residential development will soon encompass the lake, future
seaplane operations may pose a hazard. The City will continue to
monitor seaplane use of the Lake, and request review of Seaplane
operations by the Aeronautics Division of Minnesota Department of
Transportation on a periodic basis. Flying Cloud and Lakeville
airports range between 5 and 15 miles from Prior Lake. Of the
two, Flying Cloud is a more accessible facility to residents of
the community.
Prior Lake includes one publicly owned water tower which measures
115.5' in height. It is situated on the highest land within the
urban service limits of the City. There are no existing or
planned structures which are 200 feet in height. Furthermore,
the City has no plans to permit such structures in the future.
The City is aware of the Minnesota Department of Aeronautics Rule
14 MCAR. 1.3009 Criteria for determining obstructions to air
navigation. The existing zoning ordinance requires a special use
permit for any structures exceeding 35 feet in height.
11
S 112 SEC. 24 T 115 R 22
CITY IN 6MAMO E CITY O MAN E
N
Q
ICY:
LWD 4i8 DRIDM\TOH:Open Syae. llurY SarN:e Am
lAxlxG CIA[IIPIGTON: M1..1plaV WN 41. Cwennpn
OAIVi�AN
wDmxD xoMe �
pR,fj HERITAGE COMMUNITY 9r�UW ,
r; r 1891 1991 209>
r.
r�
"CP02P1"
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
NOTICE OF PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
You are hereby notified that the City Council will hold a Public
Hearing in the Prior Lake City Council Chambers at 4629 Dakota
Street S.E., on Monday, December 16, 1991 at 7:35 P.M.
The purpose of the Public Hearing is to consider proposed
amendments to the Transportation Plan of the Prior Lake, Year
2000 Comprehensive Plan. The amendments proposed have been
requested by the Metropolitan Council in order to address their
concerns relative to access to the Bloomington Ferry Bridge and
interchange. The amendments proposed would add several
transportation policies that pertain to development adjacent to
the County Road 18 Corridor. The policy statements are
summarized as follows:
1. A policy to prohibit additional direct land access to County
Road 18. The purpose of this policy would be to prevent
premature development along the County Road 18 Corridor.
2. A policy to prohibit additional roadway intersections to
County Road 18 until the area adjacent to it becomes part of
the Metropolitan Urban Service Area approved by the
Metropolitan Council. The purpose of this amendment is to
foster planned, orderly and contiguous growth.
3. A policy to restrict the development of access highways to
County Road 18 and the Shakopee Bypass, unless the
construction is part of the planned urban expansion of the
Metropolitan Urban Service Area and approved by the
Metropolitan Council. The purpose of this amendment 1s to
avoid premature urban investments in the rural service area.
If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should
attend this hearing. The City Council will accept oral and or
written comments. If you have questions regarding this matter,
cont ct th City �Manager's Office at 447 -4230.
Horst 11
Director of PV nning
To be published in the Prior Lake American on Monday, December 2
and 9, 1991.
4629 Dakota St. SE. Prim Lake. Minnesota 55372 1 Ph. (6121447 4230 1 Fax (612) 447 -4245
CITY OF PRIOR IAKE
BLOOMINGTON FERRY
BRIDGE /COUNTY ROAD i8
INTERCHANGE
PACKET OF INFORMATION
May, 1991
TO: Prior Lake American
From: Mayor Lee Andren and City Councilmembers
Date: April 16, 1991
RE: Guest Editorial: Bloomington Ferry Bridge /County Road
16 Interchange
We are taking this opportunity through the Prior Lake American to
inform you, the citizens of Prior Lake, of a recent decision of
the Metropolitan Council which has EXCLUDED PRIOR LAKE RESIDENTS
from safe and direct access to the new Bloomington Ferry Bridge.
We feel this decision will place residents at risk during rush
hour traffic, seriously undermine our safety improvements on
Highway 13, and materially affect our community's economic
future.
On April 11, 1991 the Metropolitan Council (an appointed body
charged with Twin Cities metropolitan area planning) voted to
DELETE the paving of the southbound loop and northbound ramp of
the County Road 16 Bloomington Ferry Bridge interchange,
rendering them unusacle. This loop and ramp would have provided
Prior Lake residents with direct access to the new bridge. The
primary concern of the Metropolitan Council and their staff is
their fear that a portion of the rural service area located
between Shakopee and Savage may experience premature urban
development pressure. This is a legitimate concern, however, at
the April 9 hearing, the Metropolitan Council Systems Committee
members were repeatedly told by the cities of Shakopee, Savage,
Prior Lake and Scott County that we all shared this concern and
were willing to do whatever was necessary to restrict urban
development in that area. We pointed out that the Metropolitan
Council itself had great authority to prevent development by not
authorizing the cities to provide urban services to the area.
This was all to no avail. Not only did the Metropolitan Council
appear to have little trust in our ability to keep our word and
restrict development, it appeared they had little confidence in
themselves to do so. Our 11,500 plus residents (not to mention
Savage and Shakopee area residents) have been effectively
precluded from full access to the proposed new river crossing as
a result of this action.
Replacement of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge is scheduled to start
construction this summer. Now after all the years, work, and
money the residents of Prior Lake and surrounding communities
have invested to make this bridge a reality, the Metropolitan
Council has "pulled the rug" out from under us. Prior Lake
residents will be forced by this action to access the bridge in
an unsafe, round -about manner.
The bottom line is this: In 1994 when this bridge project is
completed after an expenditure of $114,000,000, the possibility
exists that the residents of our city will be worse off than they
are now. This is unacceptable. Prior Lake's City Council and
staff will be doing all we can to secure the safe and direct
access to which you as taxpayers are entitled and have
anticipated for so long. We need your help to do this, IT IS
URGENT that you contact the following elected and appointed
officials who have supported the project and let them know you
are concerned about this situation and want their help. Governor
Arne Carlson, 296 -3391; Senator Terry Johnston, 296 -4123;
Representative Becky Kelso, 296 -1072; County Commissioner Dick
Underferth, 447 -6086; Representative Jim Ramstad 881 -4600;
Senator Dave Durenberger 370 -3382; Senator Paul Wellstone
645 -0323 and Bonnie Featherstone 890 -0889. Please also contact
the Chairperson of the Metropolitan Council, Mary Anderson, who
plays a leading role in this issue, 291 -6359.
The Metropolitan Council was presented with a rare opportunity
to exercise leadership and join the state, federal, county and
local officials who have decided to be part of the solution to
this critical transportation issue. By choosing not to do so
they have become part of the problem.
on Monday, April 15, we directed our staff to prepare a strategic
plan on an aggressive ten point solution to addressing this
critical problem. We will be finalizing and implementing this
plan within the days ahead.
If you would like more information or have questions regarding
this issue, or would like to volunteer your time, please contact
Mayor Lee Andren at 445 -7441.
Lee Andren, Mayor
John Fitzgerald, Councilmember
Doug Larson, Councilmember
Carol Scott, Councilmember
Gene White, Councilmember
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
All jurisdictions agree with the Metropolitan Council
Staff's concern to restrict premature urban development
in the rural service area. our goal is the same as that
of the Metropolitan Council. It is the means by which
this goal can be realized in which we share a difference
of opinion.
.... Prior Lake is referenced in the Metropolitan Council
Staff's report as a free standing growth center.
Although that statement is technically correct, for all
practical purposes Prior Lake is no longer a free
standing growth center.
In addition, the City of Savage recently received MUSA
line extension approval to their western boundary, thus
making adjacent Prior Lake and Savage's MUSA line
boundaries at CR 42 and T.H. 13.
.... Full access to the existing Bloomington Ferry Bridge via
County Road 18 and Trunk Highway 101 is available with
the existing bridge. The recommendation of the
Metropolitan Council staff effectively results in a
worse condition for approximately ten to seventeen
thousand vehicles in the future with the new
$114,000,000 project.
The Metropolitan Council staff's report recommends that
"the location and design of CSAH 18 between the Shakopee
bypass and I -494, with the exception of pavement of the
southbound loop and northbound ramp providing direct
access between CSAH 18 and new County Road 18 south of
the bypass in Shakopee, be approved ". This almost begs
the question of approval by recognizing the importance
of the entire project except the pavement of the
southbound loop and northbound ramp.
.... The Scott County Transportation Coalition and its
activities over the past five years have been supported
by a broad base of communities and organizations in the
entire southwestern portion of the State of Minnesota.
.... The communities of Savage and Prior Lake over the past
years, in anticipation of the new Bloomington Ferry
Bridge, have made resource allocation and planning
decisions based on its construction and ultimate
opening.
A decision to not provide a complete interchange will
compound the already significant problems on I -35W, and
State Highways 13 and Highway 101.
A complete interchange will provide for a safe and
efficient means of transportation for between ten and
seventeen thousand vehicles per day in the future. One
at -grade railroad crossing will be removed with this
interchange.
A complete interchange at the Bloomington Ferry Bridge
is one part of Scott County's overall transportation
plan.
With the Bloomington Ferry Bridge proposed for northern
Scott County, correlations have been made with
development which has occurred in northern Dakota County
during the 1980's. We do not believe that we will
duplicate the expansive growth in northern Dakota County
for at least three reasons.
... The citizens of northern Scott County have been working
diligently over the past five years, some as long as
thirty years, for the successful completion of the
Shakopee Bypass and Bloomington Ferry Bridge. It is
conceivable that the impact of the Metropolitan
Council's decision would be widely regarded as tragic.
PROJECT STAGING
POSSIBLE BREAKDOWN
wo 0 a oo
red.ral Dio ... 91 .... , F
F.4 ... I D.wo..Halo.
STAGE
F.".
STAGE STAGE Z 1 STAGE 2- AGE
� AA �A"dfl
CITYOFEDENPRAIRIE
PRO OSED
BLOOMINGTO I MRS BRIDGE
vs
CRY OF RLOONCINGTON
0 - uk.
PROJECT LAYOUT
1 7 C.S.A.1 1. 18 OVER THE MINNESOTA RIVER PHASE ONE
'A" ;.s'
H I G H W A Y
December 21, 1990
EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION
FRCGRAH
T`.e foil-win; empl ^
were recognized for
- years of service
w: Scctt Ccunty:
5 YEARS
Robert Fanner
Kevin Hanson
Lucy Pexa
?at Sircvy
Margaret Vikla
6 YEARS
Brad Larson
Pat Madden
Dann.ie Steffen
Darrell swartwcod
7 YEARS
Roger Schoentauer
9 YEARS
Joe Kane
Joan Sticha
10 YEARS
Jim Hentges
20 YEARS
Shirley Laabs
25 YEARS
Bill Schmokel
30 YEARS
Jim Pieper
CONGRATULATIONS!!!
:..d:ine :aa.mr.c I:. 1190
a Caatias Ca mhe follawin9
a.
-O clt Y. aaa
C.lta C.a.1. Ialurlu.
Flexible spendia9 Accounts
Life ins ataaca
Medical I"......
A... return the 'medical Iasuranc•
P71.112 Grata a eau:• fom to
Pl rat nnal ].PC. At y. caroee to
ncu ve tae 355 lu.P sue Daryr.:.
H I G H L I G H T S
CSAH IUBLOOHINGTON
FERRY BRIDGE
with the recent
announcement of 59.68
Million in Federal
Discretionary funding
for the Bloomington
Ferry Bridge project,
Stage I construction is
anticipated for a June,
1991 contract letting.
stage I consists of
construction of a
3 -span steel plate
girder bridge over the
main channel of the
Minnesota River. also
included will be
environmental and
erosion control work
between existing TH 101
and Old Shakopee Foad.
Total cont. - act prize is
estimated at 5:2.1
Million.
Issue IS
The estimated cost for
Phase 1 cccstructicn
(Shakopee Bypass to
10-'nd Street) is S113.9
Mil' -ion, as shown.
below. At present,
545.08 million in funds
have been obligated.
Possible staging of
Phase 1 construction is
shown on the back. The
actual staging will
depend on funding
ava:labi'Ity and type
of fending (certain
Federal monies can only
be expended on specific
portions of the
Project). It is
anticipated that some
of tae stages will ba
combined in a 3oint
letting and all
construction be
completed by the end c.
1999.
b c:SacM roa: ec::a.a
l :el.uur! :s :.10
1.r0 rr!.:itn
r: a::ea:0n • ::::an
0..r ).:o r::::an
so,:h
Soy :] >ppraac.:u• 3:' '
Ya ::n >Ppra c :lS• • I'
9:. e .
:C Sl baser -e::ao 3:.'0 r1_..an
Cra:'o nn0 i bat:a:a :n, q :
,av: r: a; ec: 9::I. 90
:dn [loom ca' -an rice - t are ;e :ecr. :_a - :! a: lr.;r n9
• Tx :1 :. :aes r_ -atGe ae :SAN 18 -1 saxr as 3Y a;a
pas act :oa IScC >PP:acn. are ::32: 9:: oe Idt of :aN Se
rc: c0 ADD rc.c ai
MSTS /RIMING
9.tJ.Cld 9n :.ct rJ'mna
:9::GA:ID Fvra
Fade:a: Ganocs :rem :gn Pone f :5.g1 M::::on
Fade ra: 0:a-. e..aear! Fuda 9. i3
State Grant C.0 ri ":on
Scot_ : :=t7 A6al'Sion Tu - ^0 •- - --
(5500,000 /Tr.. 3959 -19931 ,
Su0 -Total G0::0at4d FuadS $45.09 Million
MnSC: rVNO3
r.d. :.l funds
559.
:s
Million
star. Grand
1.17
Million
0.ercapin County
4.21
Million
Scat: County I:a .1ddiclan to Ah113
131 4.'11
r• _en
Sub -TOCai rtapoaed Fur."
9 99.81
Minion
Total rutd:n9
31:1.90
Million•
•• Al of 0.c.at.0 1, L990 - male I
rT E R R Y C H R I S T R A S E V E R Y 0 :1 E :
CITY COUNCIL STRATEGY
i. Staff will continue efforts to work with the
Metropolitan Council, especially District 14
Representative, Bonnie Featherstone, and Metropolitan
Council staff.
2. City staff shall attempt to secure from the Metropolitan
council, in writing, identification of the specific
changes that must occur in order for the loop and ramp
to be paved, and a written commitment from the Council
that if these changes occur they will take action to
overturn their initial decision.
3. Staff will organize an effort to include the City
Council, staff and local citizens to participate ari
press politically through active and direct
communication with elected and appointed officials the
great need for complete, safe and direct access to the
Bloomington Ferry Bridge.
4. Staff to secure a commitment from other jurisdictions to
support our position and request their help, aid and
assistance in accomplishing this common objective.
Staff shall contact the Mdewakanton Sioux community to
seek their support and assistance for this objective.
5. Communicate with our citizens about this problem. Begin
with an open letter to the citizens of prior Lake from
the Mayor and City Council informing them of the
situation and requesting their help in communicating
with elected and appointed officials.
6. Staff will organize a meeting with our elected
representatives and appointed officials to request their
help in rectifying the situation.
7. The Metropolitan Council indicated they will reconsider
their decision within two years. Endeavor to move the
two year timeframe up. The sooner the process is begun,
the better off we will be.
8. Staff shall nobilize our Highway 13 Task Force so they
know the Metropolitan Council staff proposal has
jeopardized their hard work on improving the safety of
Highway 13. Convey to them that their assistance is
needed in contacting elected and appointed officials so
that we don't return to the dangers which existed
previously on Highway 13.
9. The City Council is concerned over the impact the
Metropolitan Council's decision will have on our
investment and infrastructure. we have considerable
dollars invested in infrastructure in anticipation of
the bridge and safe access to the bridge.
Council directs the City attorney to research the
possibility of litigation to determine whether or not
some of that investment is recoverable in the event we
are denied complete, safe and direct access to the
Bloomington Ferry Bridge. Also to determine if the
action of the Metropolitan Council was within their
appropriate legal framework.
10. Consider instituting legislative changes through our
elected officials. Discuss with them the feasibility or
practicality of a "bill" to be introduced whicn would
effectively over rule the Metropolitan Council's
decision.
GOVERNOR
Governor Arne Carlson
Office of the Governor
130 State Capitol
St. Paul, MN 55155
Phone: 296 -3391
STATE SENATOR
Senator Terry Johnston
151 State Office Buiilding
St. Paul, MN 55155 -1298
Phone: (W) 296 -4123
(H) 445 -7447
STATE REPRESENTATIVE
D1Str1Ct 36
Representative Becky Kelso
329 State Office Building Phone: (W) 296 -1072
St. Paul, MN 55155 -1298
U. S.
SENATORS
Senator Dave Durenberger
12 S. 6th Street Room 1010
Phone:
370 -3382
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Senator Paul Wellstone
Court International Building
2550 University Avenue
Phone:
645 -0323
St. Paul, MN 55114
U. S.
CONGRESSMAN
Mr. Jim Ramstad
8120 Penn Avenue S. Suite 152
Phone:
881 -4600
Bloomington, MN 55431
SCOTT COUNTY COMMISSIONER
Dick Underferth
16670 Franklin Trail SE
Suite 110
Phone:
447 -6086
Prior Lake, MN 55372
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Bonnie Featherstone
908 Woodlawn Court
Phone:
890 -0889
Burnsville, MN 55337
Mary Anderson
Metropolitan Council
Mears Park Centre
Phone:
291 -6359
230 East Fifth St.
St. Paul, MN 55101
CountyAoad.18 -_Trunk Highway 101 Shakopee Bypass Interchange d
lift - M 4nJr lmrorolon
ar4 I
1 , t � nIV NoaJ IM 4mp anJ (
Namy RrInN UlacuntJ � 1�
•� Ili
•
U[OVEk BYYM1`^ - •ter •� _ _ _ �' �� _. .. .•
Cl >L%
Exhibit F
County -Road 10 --Trunk NI9hWi - M- ShekVBee -flyg s Interchang
�e
— — — — —_
A. rade Inloupinn
€'
W
AI Godr Ball aJ <roW.,
� f ounry H.1111
In 1 P and
`
ry WmP RrinR
Ill.+uprd
f
�
1
Sou�aQCuwD
F
/
C/
V
W
{
G
Exhibit P
Future Highway System
axw•
w w
I n n +
w wyw• '°' y�M
I rc
VAuFYI� nlp!LUUIJVILC
EA ° F
`\ Scott County Transportation Coalition
rl J.uvO.UtY 1991
RESOLUTION NO. R -91- 66
A RESOLUTION STATING SUPPORT FOR
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE'S POSITIONS RELATIVE TO
THE SECURING OF FULL AND DIRECT ACCESS TO THE
THE BLOOMINGTON FERRY BRIDGE FROM SCOTT COUNTY ROAD 18
WHEREAS, for many years residents of northern Scott County and
other areas south of the Minnesota River have sought safe, quick,
and convenient traversal of the Minnesota River; and
WHEREAS, the replacement of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge, scheduled
to start construction in 1991, will meet that goal; and
WHEREAS, critical to the mission of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge
replacement is direct access to Scott County Road 18, as it exists
south of Trunk Highway 101; and
WHEREAS, on April 11th, 1991, the Metropolitan Council took action
to deny direct access to the new bridge from that roadway, which
action will instead force travelers of Scott County Road 18 to
utilize wasteful and confusing circuitous routes utilizing frontage
roads to gain access; and
WHEREAS, this alternate access as directed by the Metropolitan
Council will have a deleterious affect upon existing and future
populations of Scott County and surrounding areas, and, specifi-
cally, the cities of Prior Lake and Savage, most of whose popula-
tion currently resides within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area;
and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council did indicate that it would re-
examine the issue within two years to determine whether the
directive would continue; and
WHEREAS, the City of Prior Lake has set forth a strategy which
would seek to work with the Metropolitan Council and other affected
agencies to seek to reverse the directive of the Metropolitan
Council, thus allowing direct access by means of paving of two ramp
accesses from Scott County Road 18 to be bridge approaches; and
WHEREAS, the City of Prior Lake seeks support from the City of
Savage, and others, towards the attainment of the goal of full and
direct access from Scott County Road 18 to the Bloomington Ferry
Briage.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council that
the City of Savage hereby expresses its support for Prior Lake's
goal of "complete, safe, and direct" access to the Bloomington
Ferry Bridge, and further indicates its willingness to help, aid,
and assist towards the accomplishment of that objective.
RESOLUTION NO. R -91
Page 2
ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the City of Savage, Scott
County, Minnesota, this 25th day of April 1991
ATTEST:
]4-0 lea J. U
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
C7 n--
Don ! an, Mayor
Motion by Egan
Second by Suel
Egan aye Daleiden aye
Remer aye Morgan aye
Suel aye
RESOLUTION NO. 3396
A RESOLUTION STATING SUPPORT FOR
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE'S POSITIONS RELATIVE TO
THE SECURING OF FULL AND DIRECT ACCESS TO THE
BLOOMINGTON FERRY BRIDGE FROM SCOTT COUNTY ROAD 18
WHEREAS, for many years residents of northern Scott County and
other areas south of the Minnesota river have sought safe, quick,
and convenient traversal of the Minnesota River; and
WHEREAS, the replacement of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge,
scheduled to start construction in 1991, will meet that goal; and
WHEREAS, critical to the mission of the Bloomington Ferry
Bridge replacement is direct access to Scott County Road 18, as it
exists south of Trunk Highway 101; and
WHEREAS, on April 11, 1991, the Metropolitan Council took
action to deny direct access to the new bridge from that roadway,
which action will instead force travelers of Scott County Road 18
to utilize wasteful and confusing circuitous routes utiliLing
frontage roads to gain access; and
WHEREAS, this alternate access as directed by the Metropolitan
Council will have a deleterious affect upon existing and future
populations of Scott County and surrounding areas, and
specifically, the Cities of Prior Lake and Savage, most of whose
population currently resides within the Metropolitan Urban Services
Area; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council did indicate that it would
re- examine the issue within two years to determine whether the
directive would continue; and
WHEREAS, the City of Prior Lake has set forth a strategy which
would seek to work with the Metropolitan Council and other affected
agencies to seek to reverse the directive of the Metropolitan
Council, thus allowing direct access by means of the paving of two
ramp accesses from Scott County Road 18 to be bridge approaches;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Prior Lake seeks support from the City of
Shakopee, and others, towards the attainment of the goal of full
and direct access from Scott County Road 18 to the Bloomington
Ferry Bridge.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council
that the City of Shakopee hereby expresses its support for Prior
Lake's goal of "complete, safe, and direct" access to the
Bloomington Ferry Bridge, and further indicates its willingness to
held, aid, and assist towards the accomplishment of that objective.
Adopted in Regular Session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 7th day May, 19 1.
Mayor of e J�*f-
rAtMf Shakopee
ATTEST: 1 �I
City Clerk
Approved as to form.
��� City Attorney PI
v
S'9
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
2330 Sioux Trail NW. Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Tribal Office (612) 4458900
1/
Ms. Mary Anderson May 20, 1991
Chair, Metropolitan Council
Mears Park Centre
230 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Ms. Bonnie Featherstone
908 Woodlawn Court
Burnsville, Minnesota 55337
Dear Ms. Anderson and Ms. Featherstone:
The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community is a federally recognized
Indian tribe located in Prior Lake Minnesota. The Community is the
sole owner of Little Six, Inc. a Mdewakanton corporation which
operates gaming entertainment facilities in Prior Lake. In the past
year over 900,000 people visited our existing facilities. Last week
we broke ground for a new 135,000 square foot building which will
be completed at this time next year. We now anticipate our
attendance to at least double when the new building is opened. The
traffic to our facilities moves in surges; one inbound in early
afternoon and outbound in late afternoon, another inbound in early
evening and outbound in late evening. Today this means
approximately 2,500 vehicles; next year this number will increase
dramatically.
For the past five years we have been members of the Scott County
Transportation Coalition; we have followed the painfully slow
process which has finally led to funding of the improvements in the
Ferry Bridge and the Shakopee Bypass. At one level we are concerned
for the convenience of the people who travel to visit our facility.
Apart from the problem of flooding which, as you know, creates
severe difficulty, the journey over the river can be especially
troublesome when Canterbury Downs and Valley Fair are open in the
spring, and again in the fall when the Renaissance Festival is
open. We had high hopes that the the bridge and bypass would
alleviate these problems.
Ms. Mary Anderson
Ms. Bonnie Featherstone
May 20, 1991
page 2
For reasons which are still unclear to us, it now appears that the
Metropolitan Council has decided not to pave the feeder ramps to
and from County 18 from the new bridge. We are extremely
disappointed and concerned about the implications this decision
will have for over a million citizens of Minnesota.
This is more than a concern for convenience, lost time and
needlessly wasted gasoline. We are apprehensive about a clearly
unsafe traffic pattern which could lead to injury and even loss of
lives. The alternative route for traffic along Highway 101 involves
two at grade crossings, and also creates a traffic mix and a below
standards weave pattern along the Highway 18 off ramp and the first
intersection to the west on Highway 101.
We have been advised that the federal highway design standards
which were the basis for the award of funds would not be met by
this awkward and hazardous design for the alternate flow of
traffic, if these roads and crossings were part of the project
itself. It seems odd that nearly one hundred and fifty million
dollars can be spent on a federally funded highway project with the
net result being a traffic pattern which, at least in part, moves
along roadways which do not meet federal standards. This might be
more easily understood if the alternative pattern was unavoidable,
but it is to be intentionally created.
We are advised that the reason this approach is now recommended is
that there are some concerns at the Metropolitan Council regarding
"uncontrolled growth" in this area. With all due respect, we
suggest that there are many mechanisms available to control growth,
without degrading highway safety, and placing people and lives at
risk. The present plan appears to us to require further
examination. we hope that the full federally approved design plan
for the construction and paving of all of the Highway 18 ramps and
roadways will be included in the initial construction of this
project.
Thank you for your consideration of our views.
sincerely,
Leonard Prescott
Chairman
Vote will limit Co. Rd 1
18 access to F
Ferry Bridl
Metropolitan Council's concern over development in area factor in decisi(
By shell. everts
sl.ftwriter
M .pc,ed. the Mevopbr n u
uA. '
'
�M ch n ea lV the design
remmmendaoon bar wuu1J prevent O
O ate city d N r IVta have a <
< prey ( U k U ter h
he hem of the wungl
JIrL I
Insew lug I hT nJ rluf f
f Ir h 1 1 1 IJr
p j
Rrt nr n�rr I
Jr maven I h hlQ r• milli h
h l I t v LL I II re.l p
j The L
koad lN.Thrc II - I h
la l
little K M < d'•
rht r N I e plan
,is diss I
I r
J I µ I µl ...Iry I
III I«df Sh k p dPo.a
pl o
h h_ ul 0 I I _ IOlhaala h
11 nmllHll t I net
and rt evduae t xcess quest
,loo,u he'r I of I
w•InmMnugh 1
lh h J
aapprmeJhy h ai s
out IIN re. N
N
s a
e s
(oturd id, lJ U
null •I II K able n. g t k
there W
l A a
.,
o rK }ro ;
ve M
b IIS vIa
; N
dr there u Na mull puchan h
hi m(1. ud .
Mruuar.blFfo l
rmryq Ire e
.. war n
roll'( unc l M
e( er nn '
rJ nuytLnlµ .ulJ o
., slid D, o
Mc�mr te ll (the r
od I .
K Jecoron w i made hecauss IK p
pr .
r I
.,i Y
d I c
nunnlrsmnarmW ho
amun t
we a
anther•by n nut nu their
the w
hand I lie b
lo
r
nher, l
be Met (wa.mlonlydo- l
�
`S1 .m m
u r m vma I a n h ld
�mfl. menl. d<n1 to ¢ e, ■ •rI h I.—to-it aW
FnIKlanne vId IK c1 until • P n dr III Mu di, Nn r f count• Hand In hawern
('ounal F - IM I L U
.1 wnv n¢d that he Io es of - u null via m a Ili Sh turn B. r.
•nakopr< Savag< and form' like tou count'.
uIkld Iogahv enough m We're going to make yd Ilgh 41u4 vote
1<vclopa lung- range compre hen'. ve for nnwortwnhomn,v, e ver I. pa mnllhe �Iru
mJ
eve, huram sari. No n drr•n'r nNM mnJ r.mpq
trial wJldee rmme what tole ° •s ln�ml aunt
Kyw nII lKenl ne ared W—lo r ary
mlK late awn Yfrom h Fa
o ar neiove sa�lllh<annnrd
1.N ` ha emir lrJrnwY the Y wMn oNeruhar all orp— ta^rertd r 9h..A.,
p..e
am wdre as nrJ with hdWnd anynmes ov wlre• pl F IJIt
V.IS It) 1..,
t he nrl lnof M I
Kr ail hwc dKh I d u . n..i a.a,,o(,.nl,
m I eorr m n lolior wh r•a ill- -1 C'nu ul a pn r and e r a m ume n kind kind of ore te a m y ' ilu phran I 1 drt 4
would umryl e, hrb Aar< wrrtuully war ma rill[ invest I.—Lb.. lano ■T71 'ru
.1
I
o Rmme Iley Ia Jrcnk. •le In<al, o ill on beeralm naYluhm bThpan 'uh. .1s, ram, k e Ib1 m m w a By,., m usuhm
mgor ory LY Hurt hYC me Bypas• plan: in Ili
n <n she
he, w he d
bet menthe t d
Mrwccn the hYN'•
IN
and
e,
end
do
han
re
u1<
un
a p
SII.kO1M. V.IISY plWN April 18, 1991
and
e,
end
do
han
re
u1<
un
a p
SII.kO1M. V.IISY plWN April 18, 1991
Steps to the bridge
City adopts plan to promote bridge
access issue and keep public informed
By Jim Rfccioli
Editor
Knee deep in its own concerns,
the city of Prior lake has built the
steps it feels it needs to climb to
overcome the prospect of restricted
access to a new river crossing into
Bloomington.
At its May 6 meeting, the City
Council adopted a 10 -step plan fai-
tially proposed in April, when the
city discovered the MetropoHUn
Council favored only Limited, wdi-
«et access from County Road 18 to
the highway bridge that will replace
the Bloomington Ferry Bridge.
Under the current plan, commut-
ers driving northbound along County
Road 18 would have to drive west
onto Minnesota Highway 101, make
a U -turn at a newly graded interim-
unit a half-mile away and backtrack
to the bridge interchange with High-
way 101. Commuters would then use
a looping entrance ramp to access the
bridge.
The Met Council has stated that it
is concemed above what impact a full
interchange would have on the rural
region where the improved roadway
and river crossing would be built.
Officials say premature development
is a critical concern, one shared by
surrounding cities.
However, the city of Prior lake
has objected to the plan, arguing that
the indirect access route will binder
local development which the city has
anticipated and planned for two dec-
ades. A direct - access interchange
between the bridge and County Road
18 would allow commuters to use
entrance and exit ramps without us-
ing Highway 101.
"We've been very aggressive oo
this issue, and the other communities
have commended us o0 our efforts,"
City Manager Dave Unmacht told
the council last week. "Obviously
we're the principally affected party,
but many of the (communities) are
failing in line with our action."
The following are the 10 steps,
including several which have already
been enacted during the past month.
*City staff will coauoue efforts to
work with the Metropolitan Council,
especialiv its local representative
Bonnie Featherstone, sad its staff.
-City staff shall attempt o secure
(in writing) from the Met Council a
description of the specific changes
that must occur before a County
Road 16 loop and ramp could be
paved at the interchange. The city
will also ask Met Council topmause,
in writing, to overturn its artier
decision once these conditions are
met.
.City staff will include the City
Councd, staff and local residents in
an effort to apply political pressure
by communicating with elected sod
appointed officials, pointing out "the
great need for complete, safe and
direct access to the Bloomington
Ferry Bridge."
"City staff will secure a commit-
ment from other jurisdictions to sup-
port Prior Lake's position. Already,
resolutions have been considered by
the city councils in Savage and
Shakopee. The city will also ap.
proach the Mdewakaoton Sioux
Community for suppon.
*The city will communicate with
residents about the issue, such as in
an open letter to the public published
in the April 22 issue of the Prior Lake
American.
*City staff will organize a meet-
ing with elected representatives (to.
cluding State Sea. Terry Jobmtoo
and Stare Rep. Becky Kelso) and
Access to back page
appointed officials to request their
help to bringing about direct access.
•The city will work to get the
access issue reconsidered as soon as
possible. The Ma Councd has prom-
ised to review the issue within two
years, preferably after area cities
have completed amending their
comprehensive land -use plans.
•City staff shall try to mobilize
the volunteer Highway 13 Task
Form, encouraging the task form to
contact elected and appointed offi-
cials. The city has pointed out that
indirect County Road 18 access to
the new bridge could form more traf-
fic to use Mimesou Highway 13
between Prior lake and Minnesota
Highway 101, thus increasing traffic
danger on Highway 13 through Prior
Lake. The task form has worked to
encourage improvements on the
highway for the past three years and
might view the County Road 18 ac-
cess issue as a setback.
-The City Council should con-
sider litigation to offset the loss of
investments in infrastructure (mainly
mad development) in Prior lake di-
rectly or indirectly tied to a County
Road 18 interchange with the bridge.
The city says it won't consider litiga-
tion unless talks with the Met Coun-
cil break down and other efforts fail.
No lawsuit is currently being pre-
pared, the city added.
-T city will try to promote
legislative changes through elected
officials, who might sponsor a bill to
reverse the Met Council's previous
action.
Prior fake Mayor Lee Andrea
said Met Councd Chairwoman Mary
Anderson has agreed to set up a
meeting with Met Council, Prior
Lake and other area officials. "She
would like to tit down a process to
put this issue to an end, - Andren said.
C.S. Sett. Paul We0stooe has also
communicated with the Met Council
in an attempt to re -open access, she
added.
Councilman Doug Larson said
the city should also keep the Public
abreast if talks break down with the
Met Council or the issue appears to
stagnate. "One of the things we
should consider in the event there's a
breakdown in the progress is oo: let'
ting the citizens forget about this,"
Larson said. "The moment things
break down, 1 want to be on these
guys like a thousand bricks."
Prior fake American
May 13, 1991
Page 4 Shakopee Valley News Aprll 18, 1981
Shakopee Talley New
Editorial
Good intention, but bad decision
Last week the Metropolitan Council made a
decision that was well- intended, but not well
thought -out.
The council followed a staff recommenda-
tion that an interchange connecting County Road
IS to the new Bloomington Ferry Bridge be
restricted so that direct access is impossible. The
decision will be resiewed in two %ears.
The Met Council action was based on its
concern that the interchange w ould intensifv
development pressure in that area. The mostly
undeveloped land is outside existing municipal
utilities set\ ices area (MUSA) of either Shakopee
or Sa%aae. The Met Council. the agency that
regulates development in the metro area, is against
development in that area until utilities are ex-
tended there, and rightfully so.
Even though the %let Council will reconsider
its decision in two years, that doesn't mean
direct access will be added. then or e%er. Much
of that decision will be based on contents of
comprehensive land -use plans from surround.
ing cities, such as Shakopee.
While the council is right in its concerns, its
decision will cause a major hardship for Prior
Lake residents, and a much lesser one for motor-
ists from Shakopee. In fact, Prior Lake city
officials have said the city would be better off if
the new river crossing were not built at all.
Motorists traveling on County Road 18 from
Prior Lake will be able to get on the Fern Bridge,
but it will require driving onto a service road.
heading awav from the bridge, making a loop
and heading back.
It would be much simpler — and less troub-
lesome — for the nearby cities to agree to place
a moratorium on development in that area, which
was offered and rejected by Met Council staff.
which apparently has never seen County Road
IS traffic, particularly during rush hour.
The Met Council should change its decision.
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth St., St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
DATE: April 3, 1991
TO: Metropolitan Systems Committee
FROM: Ann Braden (Transportation)
SUBJECT: County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 18 and Bloomington Ferry Bridge.
Study Report and Request for Controlled Access Approval, Ref.
#15301 -1. Council Districts 12, 13 and 14.
AUTHORITY TO REVIEW
On December 14, 1990, Hennepin and Scott Counties submitted a Study Report and request
for Council approval of CSAH 18 from TH 101/Shakopee Bypass to I.494. The authority
to approve controlled access highways in the seven county area was granted to the Council
in the 1974 Metropolitan Reorganization Act. In accordance with the statute, the Council
shall ". . . review the statement to ascertain its consistency with its policy plan and the
development guide. No such project may be undertaken unless the Council determines that
it is consistent with the policy plan and development program..:'
As shown on Figures 1 and 2, CSAH 18 is proposed to be constructed as a four -lane divided
expressway that connects on the south to the TH 101/Shakopee Bypass, provides interchange
access to a new Scott County Road 18 (old County Road 89) to the south and interchange
access to TH 101 in Shakopee. CSAH 18 crosses the Minnesota River and valley on a new
Bloomington Ferry Bridge and follows the existing CSAH 18 alignment north to I -494. A
grade separated connection is included at 108th Street and at- grade, signalized intersections
are proposed at 102nd Street, Anderson Lakes Parkway and Highwood Dr.
The new CSAH 18 bridge will cross the Minnesota River Valley between Fisher and Rice
Lakes. The existing Bloomington Ferry Bridge will be left open to traffic during
construction. The new bridge will provide separate northbound and southbound structures
each with two 12 -foot lanes, a 12 -foot auxiliary lane, and 8-foot inside and outside shoulders.
South of the river, the southbound structure will have an extra lane to accommodate a two -
lane exit ramp to TH 101. The median cavity between the northbound and southbound
bridges will be approximately 40 feet wide to accommodate a potential future transit facility
such as HOV lanes, bus lanes or L.RT.
The project will be constructed in stages. The first stage involves the construction of the
main river spans of the bridge, and grading the approaches from the bridge abutments to
TH 101 at the south end and to 108th St at the north end. This construction is proposed
to begin in the summer of 1991. $9.68 million of Federal Discretionary Bridge Funds have
been earmarked to construct the first stage of the project. The total project is estimated to
be completed by the end of 1994.
PREVIOUS REVIEWS
CSAH 18 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS)
Past Council reviews found the proposed new bridge and highway project, without the
specific County Road 89 connection, to be a needed improvement and, if properly
constructed, consistent with the Metropolitan Development Investment Framework (MDIF).
However, in its review of the DEIS in March, 1983 the Council raised several concerns
about the potential negative impacts of the upgraded roadway design upon the rural service
area and the Freestanding Growth Centers of Shakopee and Prior Lake. Those comments
relating to the MDIF policy and potential land use impacts are repeated below:
Economic Development: This discussion views economic development as completely
positive. This is not the case in many situations, and the report should note the
negative s ?de of the issue. For example, development in this area may cause
additional urban services to be promoted to serve scattered development pockets.
Such development may also cause premature conversion of agricultural land to urban
use. In addition, the status of Shakopee and Prior Lake as Freestanding Growth
Centers should be discussed. The need for or desirability of peak -hour highway
access from these two cities to Minneapolis or other job locations is not consistent
with Council policies.
Future Residential Development Freeway Alternative: The comment in the table
states 'Freeway alternative enhances development to a greater degree because of
reduced travel time." The reader may interpret this to be a positive impact. If it is
true, as stated on page 74, that the freeway alternatives would promote and serve
land use development beyond the MUSH, this should be noted as inconsistent with
regional policies in this table.
Mitigating Measures: The text should point out that planning, zoning and other
growth management controls have not been very effective in controlling premature
development. In fact, the best method to control such development is to restrict
access and other urban services.
CSAH 18 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (FEIS)
In February, 1987 the Metropolitan Council reviewed the FEIS for this project. The FEIS
identified Alternative 5 (a four -lane arterial with at -grade intersections, located on a western
alignment) as the preferred alternative. The final EIS did not show exactly how CSAH 18
would connect to the Shakopee Bypass. In 1987 CSAH 18 south of I494 was not a
metropolitan highway. In its review of the final EIS, the Council identified alternative 5 as
the preferred alternative; recommended the final design of Alternative 5 should retain the
flexibility to expand from 4 to 6 lanes at a later stage, and said the Council would consider
adding this segment of CSAH 18 to the metropolitan highway system (which it did, in 1988).
SHAKOPEE BYPASS FEIS
In June, 1987 the Council gave controlled access approval to the Shakopee Bypass. As
shown in Figure 3, the Bypass design included a diamond interchange with Old County Rd
89 (now Co.Rd. 18) at the eastern end of the Bypass.
BLOOMINGTON FERRY BRIDGE
In December, 1989 the Metropolitan Council accepted the Major River Crossings Study
which identified the CSAH 18 Bloomington Ferry bridge as its highest regional priority for
improvement. Staff was instructed to use the River Crossings Study as the major source of
data for the revision to the highway project rankings section of the Transportation Policy
Plan.
DISCUSSION
Re search and _ (Bob Davis
A primary MDIF issue is the proposed direct non -stop connection from CSAH 18 to a
relocated Co. Rd. 18 (Old Scott County Road 89) in the rural service area of Shakopee (See
Figure 4). The study report contains the following language:
"This design includes a proposed interchange with a new Scott County State Aid Highway
18 providing direct access south into Scott County. A recent transportation study, conducted
by Scott County, identifies the need for this access. Existing County Road 18 (Old County
Road 89) will continue to provide local access in the area."
"This design replaces the diamond interchange ramps at Scott County Road 18 (Old County
Road 89) proposed to be constructed as part of the T.H. 101/Shakopee Bypass project and
requires realignment of the Bypass roadways in this area. This work has been coordinated
with MnDOT staff. As project development proceeds, continuing coordination is required
with MnDOT and other agencies."
The following land use impacts of the proposed project are also noted in the Study Report:
Page 28 FARMLANDS -'The T.H. 101/Shakopee Bypass connection would encroach on
existing farmland. However, no significant impacts are anticipated to farmland in the area
based on existing land use and soil types."
Page 30 LAND USE Access -'The proposed project improves access and reduces travel
time to areas south of the Minnesota River. Development in these areas can be expected
after the access is provided"
As early as 1981, Shakopee's Comprehensive Plan proposed an interchange between the
proposed Shakopee Bypass and Old County Road 89 to the south. (Figure 3) This
interchange was also approved by the Metropolitan Council in approving the Shakopee
Bypass layouts. None of the previous documents reviewed have indicated direct access from
the new CSAH 18 freeway from the north to Old County Road 89 (Co. Rd. 18) south of the
Shakopee Bypass.
On March 21 the County submitted a proposal to meet the Council's goal of preventing
premature development outside the MUSA by controlling direct access along proposed and
existing CSAH 18 south of the Bypass to CSAH 42 (Attachment A). The county is
proposing to limit the number of driveways and intersecting streets along CSAH 18.
Although this action might limit direct access to the road for a few adjacent landowners, the
proposed highway will still be visible and accessible to the rural service area. CSAH 18
south of the Bypass is proposed as an urban service roadway and would still function as an
inducement to greater urbanization in the rural service area it traverses. The project as
proposed remains inconsistent with the MDIF.
In conclusion, the CSAH 18 Study Report contains no design concepts, staging plans or
proposed controls that would respond to the rural land use development and Freestanding
Growth Center concerns raised by the Council in its review of the DEIS. The potential for
increased accessibility to the rural area south of the Shakopee Bypass has, in fact, been
increased with the proposed direct connection interchange to a new CSAH 18 route south
of the Shakopee Bypass. This increased access to undeveloped land is acknowledged in the
Report. The current Shakopee Plan shows the area south of the Shakopee Bypass as rural.
The Council has not reviewed any comprehensive plans from either Shakopee or Scott
County that propose to change land use, to add a new CSAH 18, or to expand Old County
Road 89 south of T.H. 101. Therefore, at this time the proposed direct connection from
CSAH 18 to a new CSAH 18 south of the Bypass is inconsistent with both the MDIF and
the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan.
Transportation (Ann Braden)
Since the Council reviewed the FEIS for this project, CSAH 18 south of I -494 to the
Shakopee Bypass has been added to the Metropolitan Highway System, and the CSAH 18
(Bloomington Ferry) Bridge was ranked as the first priority of the Major River Crossings
Task Force.
In its recommendations on the FEIS for CSAH 18, the Council recommended that the final
design of the preferred alternative should retain the Berobility to expand from 4 to 6 lanes
at a later stage. As noted in the above project description, the bridge has been designed to
accommodate additional transit lanes at a future date. CSAH 18 north of the bridge, which
will be built as a later phase of the project is still being planned as a four lane arterial with
intersections; however during the final design of the project the impacts of both four -lane
and a six -lane expressways and a four -lane freeway will be examined. Although either an
expressway or freeway option would be consistent with the recommendations of the FEIS,
Council transportation policies would support the inclusion of HOV lanes and metered
ramps with bypass lanes if a freeway design were selected. If the design changes from the
current 4 lane arterial, the county must resubmit the project for approval of the revised
design.
The connection between CSAH 18 and the Shakopee Bypass was not illustrated in the FEIS
for the Shakopee Bypass which the Council approved in 1987. The Shakopee Bypass design
showed a standard diamond interchange between the Bypass and Co. Rd. 18 (old Co. Rd.
89). As described above, the current proposed connection between CSAH 18 and the
Shakopee Bypass shows direct non -stop access to the rural area of Shakopee via a realigned
Scott Co. Rd. 18 (Old Co. Rd. 89). Deleting the nor:hhound ramp and southbound loop
from this interchange would be consistent with the design approved for the Shakopee Bypass
because it would allow for the same directional movements between the Shakopee Bypass
and CSAH 18 from the north without providing direct non -stop access to the rural area
south of the Bypass.
Since this review began, Council staff met with Scott County staff and officials to discuss this
interchange. The County submitted a traffic analysis of the impacts of removing the
northbound ramp and southbound loop from this proposed interchange design. The analysis
concluded that by the year 2010, without those ramps, there would be more congestion on
existing TH 101 for trips destined to the south and east of the Shakopee Bypass. However,
because the Shakopee Bypass has been designed as a principal arterial to carry the higher -
speed, longer trips, existing TH 101 will, in the future, serve these more local trips, and
slower speeds are to be expected.
It should be also be noted that MnDOT is continuing to plan for a diamond interchange
between the Shakopee Bypass and Co. Rd. 18 (Old Co. Rd. 89). MnDOT is aware of the
alternative design proposed by Scott County for a Shakopee Bypass interchange with
relocated Co. Rd. 18; however, Shakopee and Scott County have not yet asked Mn/DOT to
abandon plans for the diamond interchange and replace them with the county's design.
Water Quality (Jack Frost)
In January 1990 the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agreed to a goal to reduce the amount of nonpoint
source pollution entering the Minnesota River by 40 percent from 1980 levels by July 1,
1995. The Council is taking an active role in meeting this goal because of the possibility of
increased effluent standards at both the Blue Lake and Seneca wastewater treatment plants
if this goal is not met.
Based on extensive water quality sampling being done by the Metropolitan Waste Control
Commission it has been demonstrated that a great deal of heavy metals runs off impervious
surfaces during rainfalls. Therefore, appropriately designed detention facilities (ones that
settle fine particles) are needed as part of major highway projects to reduce heavy metal
loadings from runoff before they are discharged into adjacent waterbodies, i.e. Minnesota
River.
This plan discusses coordination with both Bloomington and Eden Prairie for areas north
of the river but does not discuss the various watershed districts or areas south of the river.
Since the MPCA has placed a high priority on the cleanup of the Minnesota River it will
also be necessary that extra care and consideration of erosion and sediment control
measures be taken during construction of this highway. This is not discussed in the report.
It is also noted that a small wetland located south of the river will be filled as part of the
interchange. Council policies in its Water Resources Management Development
Guide/Policy Plan, Part 3 indicate:
Policy 3 -4:
The Council through its numerous reviews and approval authorities, will preserve all
protected and unprotected natural watercourses -- including associated wetlands,
channels, floodplains and shorelands — to enhance water quantity and quality and to
preserve their ecological functions."
Policy 3 -5:
To preserve and manage natural watercourses and water bodies, there should be no
structural development in the floodplain of a stream, or lake as defined by the local
floodplain and shoreland ordinances and maps. Strict prohibition of development
below the elevation of the lake's first natural or artificial outflow should be the rule
on closed -basin lakes. Utility lines and roadways should be routed to eliminate
damage to water and related resources. Finally, whenever an element of the natural
drainage system is altered or destroyed, a compensating or mitigating measure should
be provided.
This project must address the mitigation measures it will take to comply with these Council
policies.
Sewers (Jack Frost)
Secondary development caused by this project needs to be addressed. Any urban
development generated by this project will be provided with sewer service at either the Blue
Lake or Seneca W WTPs. These plants are currently being expanded and upgraded at a cost
of $184 million. Assumptions for these expansions are based upon MDIF policies and
development focuses in each of these treatment plant tributary areas. No sewer service was
assumed for the Shakopee Waal service area south of the Bypass. If these development
assumptions are changed because of this project an analysis of its impacts on the treatment
6
plants must be made.
Parks (Arne Stefferud)
Page 11 of the report includes statements proposing to fill in a wetland in the Anderson
Lakes Area (part of Hyland- Bush - Anderson Lake Park Reserve) as an alternative to
bridging the wetland. Environmental studies and cost comparisons of filling the wetland
versus bridging are yet to be done. The report states that the state Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) will review these study results and must approve an alternative. The
Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District ( SHRPD) should also review the study results
and comment to the DNR.
The report also indicates that park land in the Hyland - Bush - Anderson Lakes Park Reserve
will be needed to provide adequate right-of-way for the expanded highway. This land is
owned by Hennepin Parks and will be replaced with other land. The report states that the
Bloomington City Council has approved this exchange. The SHRPD should also approve
this land exchange since they - -not the city of Bloomington -own this park land.
Paget 71 and 72 adequately address bicycle /pedestrian trail crossings over the highway
project consistent with the Joint Master Plan for the Park Reserve as well as local trail
systems managed by the cities of Bloomington and Eden Prairie.
RTB (Garneth Peterson)
The Regional Transit Board reviewed the study report and gave its support regarding the
following transit and multi -modal considerations in the design of CSAH 18:
• The bridge will be constructed with the width and loadings necessary to accommodate
future transit facilities including HOV, bus lanes or LRT;
• The report is written to support a multi-modal approach which can accommodate all
potential future transit options.
• The report indicates that the final design will include consideration of park- and -ride
lots and ramp meter bypass lanes.
FINDINGS
I. The location and design of CSAH 18 between the Shakopee Bypass and 1494 is
consistent with Metropolitan Development and investment Framework with the
exception of a portion of the proposed interchange with a new Co. Rd. 18 to be
constructed south of the Shakopee Bypass into the rural service area
2. If at some future date the Council approves a Shakopee comprehensive plan which
shows the staging of future highway improvements that are consistent with land use
and transportation proposals and coordinated with approved expansions for the
MUSA, construction of the direct access from the principal arterial portion of CSAH
18 to new Co. Rd. 18 south of the bypass would be consistent with the MDIF.
3. The construction of CSAH 18 between 1 -494 and the Shakopee Bypass is consistent
with transit plans for this corridor.
4. The proposed CSAH 18 plans imply two changes in the layouts for the Shakopee
Bypass that differ from that approved by the Council in 1987. These are the
connection with CSAH 18 to the north, and the location and the design of an
interchange with Old Co. Rd. 89. Any changes to the Shakopee Bypass layout must
be resubmitted to the Council for controlled access approval.
5. Detention ponds are needed as part of major highway projects to reduce heavy metal
loadings from runoff before they are discharged into the Minnesota River. The
impact of water runoff south of the river is not discussed in the report.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. That the Metropolitan Council approve, as shown in the study report, the location
and design of CSAH 18 between the Shakopee Bypass and 1-494 with the exception
of pavement of the southbound loop and northbound ramp providing direct access
between CSAH 18 and new Co. Rd. 18 south of the Bypass in Shakopee.
2. If at some future date the Council reviews and approves a Shakopee comprehensive
plan that would justify necessary direct access to serve an urbanizing area, Scott
County may resubmit the controlled access request for direct access between CSAH
18 and a new Co. Rd. 18 in Shakopee (south of the TH 101 bypass).
3 That the Council transmit these comments to MnDOT and ask that they resubmit the
Shakopee Bypass plans to the Council for controlled access approval, when MnDOT
and the counties resolve the design connection between the Bypass and Co. Rd. 18.
4. That any changes to the design of CSAH 18 as shown in the Study Report be
resubmitted to the Council for approval as required by state statute. If the design
changes from an expressway to a freeway, provisions for HOV lanes and metered
bypass ramps should be included in the final design.
5. That the comments prepared on the study report regarding parks, water quality, and
sewers be transmitted to the counties for consideration in additional studies.
,seta
U
.nou
101 ..... .w.•.
1 I
1 .n..
" •I II ""WASHINGTON
IF
ws,�w co
10
0 .. —
I
CSAH IS PROJECT LOCATION
Figure 1
IiEN
It .......
METROPOLITAN��
�\
COUNCIL
...
.
r Aga
_____ __cu.ir co_
<
N L 0
1 I
1 .n..
" •I II ""WASHINGTON
IF
ws,�w co
10
0 .. —
I
CSAH IS PROJECT LOCATION
Figure 1
EDEN PRAIRIE
V5
F
F �
V
Q
CA, 1
FE,P < C3AN.1B
Z
W
Kv.ypp
YnO.� -1�pry
t i p IlDeO
1 $TAFFY
noM.cc
o.o
R'yfRL SErALLITON
O HO
10RI1 ST
PROPOSED BLOOMINGTON
\y FERRY BRIDGE
FISHER LAKE
EXISTING BLOOMINGTON
FERRY BRIDGE
/ OLD
r
CS..L1L it 2
k Fq oI
i
C RICE GKE
SHAKOPEE � NIy RR i
7 MA
Y 101/SIT - %
Brrwss _
^ SAVAGE
VL IvvsuXOIQ
3500' 0 3500° — ° wAss CONNB[TION
3< u
ij
HENNEPIN A.ND SCOTT COLN — nES FFIGUREt. Slrgar-Roscoe-Eausch.Inc. COLNiY STATE AID HIGHWAY IS T LAYOUT
TT
Consulting Engineers
T.H. 1011SHAKOPEE BYPASS TO 1-494
STUD Y R EPORT
.•nulcro.
1 Oft" OOO
r
EDEN PRAIRIE
V5
F
F �
V
Q
CA, 1
FE,P < C3AN.1B
Z
W
Kv.ypp
YnO.� -1�pry
t i p IlDeO
1 $TAFFY
noM.cc
o.o
R'yfRL SErALLITON
O HO
10RI1 ST
PROPOSED BLOOMINGTON
\y FERRY BRIDGE
FISHER LAKE
EXISTING BLOOMINGTON
FERRY BRIDGE
/ OLD
r
CS..L1L it 2
k Fq oI
i
C RICE GKE
SHAKOPEE � NIy RR i
7 MA
Y 101/SIT - %
Brrwss _
^ SAVAGE
VL IvvsuXOIQ
3500' 0 3500° — ° wAss CONNB[TION
3< u
ij
HENNEPIN A.ND SCOTT COLN — nES FFIGUREt. Slrgar-Roscoe-Eausch.Inc. COLNiY STATE AID HIGHWAY IS T LAYOUT
TT
Consulting Engineers
T.H. 1011SHAKOPEE BYPASS TO 1-494
STUD Y R EPORT
N
J
PROPOSED CORRIDOR
MUSA
(added by Metropolitan CounciQ
Assumes C.S.A.H. 21 extended north and east of C.S.A.H. 42 to
the T.H. 101 /Shakopee Bypass and the C.S.A.H. 18 river
crossing.
Assumes full interchange access to the T.H. 101 /Shakopee
Bypass and the C.S.A.H. 18 river crossing.
Assumes a connection between C.S.A.H. 21 and County Road 18
immediately south of the interchange area.
. Assumes a connection of County Road 18 to existing T.H. 101.
S TJ L' srRCAR- ROSCOE- FAUSOLINC
iRP MNSMTWC WV.%TM
SCOTT CO. HIGHWAY DEPM
COUNTY ROAD 18
STUDY
ALTERNATIVE 4
Attachment A
SCOTT COUNTY
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST
JORDAN, MN 55352.9339 FAX (612) 496 -6365
BRADLEY J. LARSON
Highway Engineer
DANIEL M. JOSE
AssL Highway Engineer - Design March 21, 1991
DON D. PAULSON
Asst Highway Engineer - Construction
Mr. Nacho Diaz
Manager, Transp. Div.
Metropolitan Council
230 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
Re: CSAH 18 Interchange
with Shakopee Bypass
Access Control Permit
Dearaz:
This is In response to the Wednesday, March 13, 1991
meeting between Metropolitan Council and Scott County
officials. While I was involved in only a portion of the
meeting, it is my understanding that direction was given
for your staff and Scott County to revisit the CSAM 18
Interchange ramp /loop issue in hopes of obtaining an
agreement that is acceptable to both.
Given the above, I have outlined below my interpretation of
you and the City canitake actions county and
goal.
ray; To prevent premature development in an area
outside the Metropolitan Urban service Area
(MUSA).
1. The City of Shakopee's 1991 update of their
Comprehensive Plan expressly notes no development
along proposed County Highway 18 south of the Shakopee
Bypass. The City is adamant in not having development
occur in this area.
An Equal Opawho tylAAirmatiae Action Employee
Mr. Nacho Diaz
Re: CSAH 18
March 21, 1991
Page 2
Scott County and the Cities of Prior Lake and Shakopee
will restrict access control along the entire segment
of proposed and existing County Highway 18 from the
Shakopee Bypass south to CSAH 42. Access will be
restricted through both purchase of access control and
zoning regulations. with restricted access, potential
development is discouraged.
The Cities of Prior Lake and Shakopee and Scott County are
very sincere in meeting your goal and believe that the
above actione will accomplish what all of us want - orderly
and planned development.
we appreciate your timely review of this proposal. If
additional steps need to be taken by Scott County, please
let us know so that we may evaluate and address those
actions.
Thank you for your attention and cooperation in this
matter.
Sincerely,
/000
Bradley J. Larson, P.E.
County Highway Engineer
BJL /kmg
cc: Mary Anderson, Chair, Met Council
Commissioner Bill Roniarski
Joe Ries, County Administrator
John Boland
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
612 2916359
DATE: September 10, 1991
TO: Dennis Kraft, Shakopee
Brad Larson, Scott County
Dave Unmacht, Prior Lake
FROM: Bob Mazanec, Metropolitan Counc Oart(291-6330)
SUBJECT: CSAH 18
Metropolitan Council members Bonnie Featherstone and Mary Anderson recently asked Council
staff to explore options for resolving the issues raised by the Council's review of the CSAH 18.
Shakopee Bypass interchange proposal. The attached memorandum was drafted in response to
their request. Staff believes that it contains a foundation for reaching a solution to the
interchange issue.
Pursuant to our phone conversations, there will be a meeting of Council staff and staff from the
three affected local units of government to discuss the memorandum on September 11 at 3 p.m.
in Room 4B at the Council offices. Breaking the deadlock over this issue will require local
comprehensive plan amendments that meet the objectives laid out in the memorandum in a way
consistent with Council policy. Council staff is prepared to follow -up this initial meeting with
technical assistance to each of the parties in preparing appropriate plan amendments.
The timetable for resolving the issue depends upon the amount of time needed by the three local
governments to prepare and submit their respective plan amendments. Upon receipt of plan
amendments adequately addressing the land use and transportation issues surrounding the CSAH
18 proposal, Council staff will complete a review for Council consideration within 90 days. It is
important that the three local plans be very well coordinated with respect to their treatment of
CSAH 18 and related land use matters. Submitting working drafts of the plan amendments for
informal Council staff review and comment will help ensure a more expeditious and successful
conclusion of the issues in the Council's official plan review.
Il/'� 4 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
612 291 -6359 TDD 612 291 -0904
DATE: August 28, 1991 '
TO: Mary Anderson, Bonnie Featherstone, Dirk DeVries
FROM: Transportation & Long Range Planning Staffs
cc: Ann Braden, Bob Davis, Nacho Diaz, Anne Hurlburt, Marcel Jouseau, Roger
Israel, Bob Mazanee
SUBJECT: CSAH 18 Issue
The Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework (MDIF) last revised in September,
1986 sets a general direction for future development patterns and establishes guidelines for
making decisions about major regional facilities. Metropolitan highways and interchanges, such as
the proposed CSAH 18 interchange with the Shakopee Bypass are considered a "metropolitan
System" and receive the largest percentage of total regional dollars expended in any one year.
A major strategy emphasized in the MDIF is to manage regional resources in a way that most
efficiently serves a steadily growing and aging population. Meeting the service and facility needs
of already developed areas is the MDIFs top investment priority. A second investment priority is
given to facilities that are sized in accord with Council forecasts and programmed to support
staged and contiguous urban development.
The Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) has been established by the Metropolitan Council
to efficiently distribute public resources. It has been found that facilities and services needed to
support urban development can be provided at less public cost if the land available for urban
development at any one time is defined and reasonably limited in area. As a result, the
Metropolitan Council plans for urban development and commits to providing sufficient
metropolitan systems within the urban service area. Metropolitan systems will generally not be
provided to support urban density development in the rural service area.
MDIF geographic policy areas have also been used for ranking investment decisions. Facilities
and services needed to support urban development are located within the Metropolitan Urban
Service Area (MUSA). Metropolitan urban systems, such as freeways and sewers, will generally
not be provided in the rural service area.
The Metropolitan Council's Transportation Development Guide/Policv Plan, last revised in 1988,
is based upon the MDIF. The Transnortation Plan describes the direction the Metropolitan
Council believes metropolitan transportation investments should take between 1988 and the year
2010. It con Sins transportation policies and plans that support the MDIFs priorities for
optimizing a -e use of existing regional facilities and services, and guidelines for evaluating
potential fu;-ding sources for the region's transportation system. Construction of the Shakopee
Bypass and the new CSAH 18 bridge to replace the old Bloomington Ferry Bridge are
recommended actions of the Transnortation Plan However, the interchange on CSAH 18
providing direct access to the rural service area south of the Shakopee Bypass is not consistent
with the Council's plans.
ANALYSIS
The Highway Proposal
The proposed CSAH 18 bridge and connection to the Shakopee Bypass will be located at the
edge of the urban service area in the Freestanding growth center of Shakopee. Scott County has
proposed an intersection relocation and design change for the CSAH 18 connection to the
Shakopee Bypass which would provide direct non -stop access to the rural service area south of
the Bypass. The proposal was made in the Study Report and Request for Controlled Access
Approval, Referral #15301 -1, submitted to the Council for review on December 14, 1990.
Neither the approved Scott County plan nor the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan on record with
the Council show the interchange or reconstruction of CSAH 18 south of the Shakopee Bypass
(see attached maps).
This interchange would replace a proposed diamond interchange connecting CSAH 18 (old
County road 89) to the Shakopee Bypass south of the current intersection of highways T.H. 101
and CSAH 18. The diamond intersection is still recognized by MnDOT and is also shown in the
recently received Shakopee Comprehensive Plan amendment. CSAH 18 south of the Shakopee
Bypass traverses rural and agricLlture land in both Shakopee and in northern Prior Lake for two
and one -half miles to its intersection with CSAH 42. The two lane road winds a bit, with several
hills, forty (40) direct property access curb -cuts, plus existing intersections from north to south at
13th Avenue, Boiling Springs Lane, County Road 16, McColl Drive and Muhlenhardt Road
before joining CSAH 42. Once the direct access to the new CSAH 18 bridge is provided,
increased traffic volume, access and egress plus cross - traffic turning movements will conflict with
what currently serves as a local access road. These conditions will put heavy pressure on the
County to upgrade CSAH 18 south of the Shakopee Bypass both to keep the highway traffic
moving and for safety reasons. Scott County believes that the interchange and new connection to
CSAH 18 is necessary to eliminate existing congestion on highway 13 caused by the developing
areas of Savage and Prior Lake.
Metropolitan Council policy requires those parts of the roadway located outside the MUSA to be
designed and constructed to conform with the policies for the rural service area. In this part of
the region the Council makes no commitment to providing regional services and facilities to serve
rural residential development. In the rural service area, major arterial freeways should be
designed to serve rural transportation needs such as farm to market trips and connections to
outstate cities. Access in the rural service area should be controlled by limiting the number and
type of interchanges.
Current Land Use and P lans
Both Shakopee and Prior Lake are classified by the MDIF as Freestanding Growth Centers. The
Council considers the freestanding growth centers as detached portions of the metropolitan urban
service area. It wants the centers to prosper and grow, and to serve as alternatives to living and
working in the large central urban area. Freestanding growth centers also have an employment
base within the community that is large enough to provide work for the local population. The
Council supports regional investments in these communities; however, where additional land is
needed to accommodate growth, the communities should extend municipal services in a staged,
contiguous manner, consistent with their ability to provide such services.
Substantial rural and agricultural land Hes south of the Shakopee Bypass in the vicinity of the
proposed interchange and along CSAH 18. Both city plans show agriculture as a long term land
use. In Prior Lake 320 acres of agriculture land covenanted indefinitely under the Agricultural
Preserves Act border CSAH 18 immediately on the west. Under the Agricultural Preserves Act,
housing density is limited to one unit per 40 acres and the landowner is protected from urban
assessments, property taxes at development value and conflicting urban land uses in exchange for
a legal commitment to continue farming for at least eight years.
Metropolitan Council policy recognizes two levels of protection in the commercial agricultural
area. Primary protection is land covenanted in agricultural preserves. Urban facilities are to be
prohibited in this area unless there is documentation that no other location in the Metropolitan
Area can adequately meet the siting criteria. Secondary protection is land certified but not in
agricultural preserves. This area receives a level of protection secondary to agricultural preserves.
Urban facilities are not to be located in this area unless there is strong evidence that a proposed
urban use cannot be located in the general rural use area. All other things being equal, urban
facilities, including roadways, are not to infringe on land protected by the agricultural preserves
program.
Current land use along CSAH 18 (old highway 89) in Shakopee includes a small area of industry
(in the extreme northeast) along with pockets of rural residential (served by on -site septic
systems), vacant rural and agriculture land. No lands are covenanted under the agriculture
preservation legislation in the city of Shakopee. The Shakopee Comprehensive Plan (received
July 23, 1991) shows the area south of the Shakopee Bypass to remain in agriculture and rural
residential uses at least to the year 2000. However, Shakopee allows two and one -half acre lots
(16 lots per 40 acres) in its rural area which is inconsistent with Council policy. The 1990 Census
shows the population of Shakopee as 11,739 which is lower than the Council's forecast of 12,500.
Council staff believes that the forecasts contained in the recently submitted plan are very
optimistic. Neither Shakopee nor the Council has plans to provide metropolitan sewer service
south of the Shakopee Bypass (see Shakopee maps).
Hosting land use in Prior Lake along CSAH 18 (north of CSAH 42) includes agriculture and
rural residential served by on -site septic systems. Agriculture lands border the entire western
edge of CSAH 18 in Prior Lake north of CSAH 42. These lands (320 acres) are covenanted
indefinitely under the Agriculture Preservation AcL The Prior Lake Plan on record with the
Metropolitan Council (received August 5, 1991) shows the area as agricultural. Prior Lake
allowed development at less than a one lot per ten acre density in the rural area east of CSAH 18
which was inconsistent with Council policy. However, current Prior Lake zoning now restricts
development in the agricultural area to four units per forty acres. Prior Lake exceeded the
Council's 1990 forecasts (Census 11,482; Council forecast 11,000). Council staff believes that
while the City's future forecasts are possible they appear optimistic. Metropolitan sewer service is
provided to Prior Lake via the Prior Lake interceptor sewer. Prior Lake has extensive land area
within its MUSA and has not proposed to provide sewer service to the area north of CSAH 42
(see Prior Lake maps).
Transportation Plans
As previously mentioned the Transportation Policy Plan was updated in 1988 and subsequently a
system statement was mailed out to each county to encourage that all local plans be updated to
reflect the latest proposals and policy changes. However, the Council has not received a
transportation plan from Scott County for official review. A draft plan was submitted on Monday
August 19, 1991 for informal review by Metropolitan Council staff. Preliminary discussions with
County staff and with county engineering consultants have indicated existing congestion on
highway 13 from its entry point in eastern Scott County to the intersection with east -west CSAH
21 in Prior Lake. The existing, at grade intersection between T.H. 101 and CSAH 18, leading to
the old Ferry Bridge is also reported by Scdtt County to be congested. Consultant projections to
the year 2010 show the entire length of CSAH 1S south of T.H. 101 to CSAH 42 to be congested
in Shakopee and Prior Lake. These projections are based on Council forecasts.
The existing intersection of state highways 13 and T.H. 101 is located only one and one -half miles
east of where the proposed CSAH 18 bridge will join T.H. 101. Highway 13 currently serves as
the north -south minor arterial to the expanding urban service area of Savage and to the
developed area of the Freestandirg growth center of Prior Lake. A basic Council policy calls for
maximum utilization and improvement of existing metropolitan systems, including highways, before
constructing new service facilities. Improvements to highway 13 in Savage and Prior Lake would
be consistent with Council MDIF policy since it lies totally within the MUSA. However, Highway
13 is classified as a minor arterial, and council transportation policy encourages MnDOT to spend
its limited roadway improvement funds on the Metropolitan Highway System. Perhaps Scott
County should explore improvements to highway 13 [sing local money.
Draft long -range plan maps of Scott County show eventual relocation of the proposed CSAH 18
route south of the Shakopee Bypass as a principal arterial along a new westerly right -of -way
connecting to CSAH 21 in north - central Prior Lake. The Shakopee plan also sketches the
general location of this new route in its comprehensive plan amendment noting that plans for the
area will need to be addressed in the future. Thus, not one but two new major north south
highways are being suggested in draft plan materials of Scott County. The proposed new principal
arterial (along 1821) is located entirely in the rural service area and is inconsistent with both the
Council's MDIF and Transportation policy. Any approval of the CSAH 18 interchange should
include guarantees from the County and Cities that the new alignment to the west (relocated
county road 21) would not be constructed until the adjacent land becomes part of the MUSA.
The Metropolitan Council advocates providing increased highway capacity in a way that helps to
manage the system and that helps to manage demand on the system within the urban service area.
Incorporating techniques that manage the highway system and demand for the highway are
particularly important in the planning and design phases of a new roadway facility. These
techniques may include metering freeway entrance ramps to regulate highway access and
constructing freeway entrance ramps for exclusive use by high- occupancy vehicles. Construction
of these facilities may not be necessary at the moment. Such needs should be incorporated into
the facility design.
Sewer Treatment Plans
Any urban development generated by this project would need to be provided with sewer service
at either the Blue Lake or Seneca waste water treatment plants. These plants are currently being
expanded and upgraded at a cost of $184 million. Assumptions for these expansions are based
upon MDIF policies and development focuses in each of these treatment plant tributary areas.
No sewer service was assumed for the Shakopee rural service area south of the Bypass. If these
development assumptions are changed because of this project an analysis of its impact on the
treatment plants must be made.
FINDINGS
1. Both the MDiF and the Transportation Plan emphasize the need to manage regional
resources in a way that most efficiently serves a steadily growing and aging population.
System and demand management are critical elements to ensure the efficient use of
transportation facilities. Techniques that manage the highway system and demand for the
highway should be incorporated into the planning and design phases. These techniques
include among others the metering of freeway entrance ramps.
2. The proposed Shakopee Bypass and CSAH 18 Bridge replacement are located in the
developing area of the MUSA and are a necessary part of the Council's plans for the
region. Those parts of the roadway located in the MUSA may be designed and
constructed to serve planned urban activities. That part of the roadway in the rural
service area, including the provision of interchanges, should be designed and constructed
to serve rural transportation needs.
3. The proposed CSAH 18 interchange would provide direct access to and from the
proposed new CSAH 18 bridge into the rural service area which would have a direct
impact upon rural and agriculture lands in Shakopee and Prior Lake. The Shakopee and
Prior Lake plans currently approved by the Council show the area south of the Shakopee
Bypass to CSAH 42 to remain in agriculture and rural residential use. Lands perpetually
covenanted under the Agricultural Preserves Act border CSAH 18 on the west in the city
of Prior Lake. Plans and local measures to mitigate these land use impacts have not been
submitted to the Council. Rural land use density standards in Shakopee are inconsistent
with Council policy.
4. The CSAH 18 interchange providing direct access to the rural area south of the Shakopee
Bypass is not recommended in the Council's plans nor is it included in the locally adopted
plans, as approved by the Council; it was proposed by Scott County (In the Study Report
and Request for Controlled Access Approval, Referral #15301 -1) based primarily upon
existing congestion on highway 13 and at the current intersection of T.H. 101 and CSAH
18.
5. Highway 13 currently serves as the north -south minor arterial to the expanding urban
service area of Savage and the freestanding growth center of Prior Lake. A basic Council
policy calls for maximum utilization and improvement of existing metropolitan systems,
including highways, before constructing new service facilities. Improvements to highway
13 in Savage and Prior Lake would be consistent with Council MDIF policy since it lies
totally within the MUSA.
6. Other major north -south roadway proposals are contained in the draft plan proposals of
Scott County which are inconsistent with Council policy. Specifically the proposal to
relocate CSAH 18 as a principal north -south arterial along a new westerly right -of -way
connecting to CSAH 21 in north - central Prior Lake.
7. No Metropolitan wastewater treatment plant sewer capacity is being planned for the rural
Shakopee areas south of the Bypass.
8. Construction of the Shakopee Bypass, CSAH 18 and the proposed interchange will
require coordinating the land use and transportation activities of several local
governments. Scott County will need to submit an adopted Transportation Plan for
Council review reflecting the proposed transportation changes; Shakopee and Prior Lake
will need to update their comprehensive plans to address the interchange proposal and its
impact on land use and other services.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Council's policy objective is to encourage local comprehensive plans that are consistent
with adopted rural area policies.
2. The Council could find that the proposed connection with CSAH 18 (old County Road 89)
south of the Shakopee Bypass consistent with Council policy if the following conditions are met:
a.) Shakopee and Prior Lake submit amendments to their Comprehensive Plans, which
address the following:
• Prohibit additional direct property access to CSAH 18 be until the area becomes
part of MUSA expansions approved by the Council.
• Prohibit additional roadway intersections to CSAH 18 unless they are a result of
staged development tied to an urban service area (MUSA) expansion approved by
the Council.
• Revise rural development densities to be consistent with the Metropolitan Council
rural standards of:
- One unit per 40 acres in areas planned for agriculture
- One unit per 10 acres (computed on the basis of 40 -acre parcels) for
rural residential development.
b.) Scott County submits a revised Transportation Plan which addresses the following:
• Comprehensive Plans of Shakopee and Prior Lake,
• If CSAH 18 is to be upgraded or expanded in the future, indicate the measures
that will be taken to avoid the need to acquire protected agricultural lands in Prior
Lake including location alternatives that will have the least impact on these land,
and
• Techniques to manage the proposed access to the freeway system including, but
not limited to, metering the entrance ramp to CSAH 18 at the Shakopee Bypass.
c.) Scott County, Shakopee and Prior Lake mutually agree in their respective plan
revisions to propose no further future direct access highway routes to CSAH 18 and
CSAH 42 unless such proposals are a part of planned expansions to the MUSA, as agreed
to by the Metropolitan Council.
3. If Scott County, Shakopee and Prior Lake cannot mutually agree to these conditions,
exploration of improvements to highway 13, or another option accomplishing the same regional
polity objectives, should be considered.
/q PRIo\
m
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY TNUX V
1991 2091
1 'VA19PCn
PLANNING REPORT
SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPEAL
APPLICANT: WADE ALLISON
SITE ADDRESS: 4330 DAKOTA STREET
PRESENTER: DEB GARROSS
PUBLIC HEARING: YES X NO
DATE: DECEMBER 5, 1991
HISTORY BACKGROUND
T e Planning Department has received a variance amendment
application from Wade Allison of 4330 Dakota Street. The
applicant received a 4' foot west, front yard variance on
September 7, 1989 to construct a 24 x 34 foot garage addition to
the home. The variance was granted subject to the following
conditions: 1. That the driveway existing on Dakota Street be
eliminated; 2. That the garage be sealed off within a period of
twelve months. Mr. Allison is requesting that the Planning
Commission delete the condition that the driveway be removed.
See attached materials for memorandums and Planning Commission
minutes related to this subject.
PREVIOUS PROPOSALS:
See attached variance application and materials for Variance
89 -18.
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The applicant constructed the 24 x 34 foot garage addition as per
the variance granted in 1989. However, to date, the conditions
of approval have not been satisfied. Mr. Allison approached the
Planning Commission on September 19 and October 3, 1991 to
poll the Commission to determine whether the driveway condition
would be rescinded. The Commission advised Mr. Allison that in
order to resolve the issue, a formal variance application would
need be submitted and neighbors notified of the proposed change.
The application before the Planning Commission is to amend the
1989 variance to delete the driveway removal condition.
NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES /IMPACT /CONCERNS
Staf as een a vis a oy t�aDutting neighbor to the east that
a drainage problem exists on their lot due in part, to
construction activities on Mr. Allison's property. Building
Official, Gary Staber conducted a site inspection of the Busse
property located at 4350 Dakota Street. The drainage problem is
not associated with the garage addition that was added to the
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior take, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax(612)447-4245
west side of the home but rather is associated with retaining
wall construction. In Mr. Staber's opinion, the drainage problem
could be alleviated if the Allison Driveway were removed,
regrading along the property line occurred to channel runoff and
the Busse property be back filled up to the home to correct a
settling problem adjacent to the foundation of the home.
RECOMMENDATION:
T e recommen ation from staff is to enforce the conditions of
Variance 89 -18 as approved. There are no circumstances which
have changed since variance approval. In addition, although not
related to the original variance application, the drainage
problem could be alleviated, in part, if the driveway is removed
as required by the Planning commission.
�.Y OF PRIOR LAKE
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
Applicant: b. ,l :'E AG CI.SGn/ Horne F}roi:e: y�J " Cy i �
Address: 33. ", lrT J - 7 f ', Work Phone:
Property Owner: ([J /)r- r' t[.15i.,^ Hone P1,one: rr
Address: Work Phone:
Type of Ownership: F Contract Purchase Agreenen
Consultant /Contractor: Phone:
Existing Use
of Property:
Zoning:
of Property
Legal Descr
of Variance
n
L
-r / ! ?L_ «,
Variance Requested: ,'I P A 1) A - r 1-
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 _No
What was requested:
When: Disposition:
Describe the type of improvements proposed: A /D l'1�
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
(A)Completed application form. (B)Filing fee. (C)Property Survey. (D)Certified fran
abstract firm, names and addresses of property owners within 100 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the subject property. (E)Complete legal description a
Property Identification [Amber (PID). (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if
applicable. (G)A parcel map at 1 "- 20' -50' showing: The site development plan,
buildings: parking, loading, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility
service.
ONLY COMPLETE APPLICATIONS SHALL, BE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING, OOMMISSION.
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 provide infog ationnn and follow the
procedures as outlined in the Ordinance
Submitted this day of !'� U 1 9 `j( Applicants Signature
Fee Owners Signature
THIS SPACE IS 10 BE FILLED OUT BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR
PLANNING OMKISSION _ APPBDVED _ DENIED DATE OF HEARING
CITY COUNCIL APPEAL _ APPROVED _ DENIED DATE OF HEARING
CDNDMONS•
Signature of the Planning Director
Date
�Z _
U - 1 WEST AVEMIE
-. W
I YI
I
PROFILE SCALE /
VERT: 1 in = 10 ft
HORZ: I in = 50 ft
I
1 �
4
5
—
IW
1 Ir
W ,..
0
Y'
3 - -
47800
Gil
Lli
a
� W
o
I r
1I
ETHER
Vall
t
Z
�n
/f 6 I
W
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 1991 PAGE 2
MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI, TO APPROVE A 2.5 FOOT EAST
SIDE YARD VARIANCE, A 3.5 FOOT WEST SIDE YARD VARIANCE, AND A 44
FOOT LAKESHORE VARIANCE FOR 16158 LAKESIDE AVENUE S.E. RATIONALE
BEING THAT THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE LAND NECESSITATES A DECK, WILL
NOT INTERFERE WITH THE PRIVATE SPACE OF ADJOINING AREAS AND IS
NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Kedrowski, Roseth and
Loftus. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM III - WADE ALLISON - DISCUSSION
Mr. Graser recapped Item III that had been tabled from the last
meeting. The reason Mr. Allison is asking for this discussion
is that at the time he received the variance to construct a
garage in 1989, he didn't realize that one of the conditions was
to remove the old driveway. He now wants to poll the
Commissioners to see if they would rescind this condition if he
would apply for an amendment to the motion.
Comments from the Commissioners were on; precedent set if motion
is rescinded, possible objections by neighbors, drainage
problems, profuse amount of items accumulating in yard, and
possible alternatives explored. Final consensus was that if the
applicant wishes to apply for an amendment to the original
variance, he may do so with the understanding that the neighbors
will be notified and the decision may stay as recorded. Chairman
Loftus suggested to Mr. Allison that he submit pictures with his
application if he chooses to apply.
r updated the Commissioners on the Comprehensive Plan
upcoming Council Workshop, and topics of discussion for
ing Commission Retreat. The Commissioners suggested the
ekend in February should be considered and possible
be Planners from Shakopee, Savage, and Mdewakanton Sioux
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY ARNOLD, TO ADJOURN MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Kedrowski, Arnold, Roseth and
Loftus. MOTION CARRIED.
Meeting adjourned at 8:30 P.M. Tape of meeting on file at City
Hall.
Horst Graser Rita M. Schewe
Director of Planning Recording Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 1991 PAGE 5
9. THE APPLICANTS VIEW THE OPERATION AS AN ARTISTIC, NOT A
RETAIL OPERATION. AS SUCH, IF PROBLEMS ARISE THAT COMPROMISE
THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD DUE TO THE
OCCUPATION, THE APPLICANTS AGREE TO DISCONTINUE SALES TO THE
GENERAL PUBLIC AND WILL DISTRIBUTE WORKS THROUGH MAIL ORDER
ON A PRIVATE INVITATION ONLY.
10. THE HOME OCCUPATION WILL BE REVIEWED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS ON
CITY STAFF. IF PROBLEMS ARISE OR COMPLAINTS REGARDING THE
OCCUPATION ARE RECEIVED, THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO APPEAR
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FORMAL REVIEW OF THE HOME
OCCUPATION PERMIT.
Vote taken signified ayes by Wells, Kedrowski, Arnold, Loftus and
Roseth. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM 5 - WADE ALLISON - DISCUSSION ON PREVIOUS VARIANCE
Horst Graser presented information to the Commissioners regarding
a variance granted to Wade Allison of 4330 Dakota Street. Mr.
Allison felt he did not have time to object to a condition put
into the motion of removing the driveway. He would now like to
poll the Commissioners and if his application would be
reconsidered to amend his variance as he now wishes to retain the
driveway.
Comments from the Commissioners were to table the request to give
them time to look at the property.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO TABLE THIS ITEM TO THE
NEXT MEETING TO BE HELD OCTOBER 3, 1991.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Roseth, Arnold, Kedrowski
and Wells. MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC HEARING RECALLED TO ORDER AT 10:25 P.M.
Deb Garross presented outlined the information on Exhibit 2.
Kenneth Lillyblad, 16287 Lakeside Avenue, had a question on a lot
he owns.
MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
TO ADOPT APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED LANGUAGE TO PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE
5- 4 -1(C) AND ZONING ORDINANCE NO.83 -6 SECTION 4.1(C) AS OUTLINED
IN THE DRAFT EXHIBIT 2 AS PRESENTED SEPTEMBER 19, 1991.
Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Roseth, Wells, and Loftus.
MOTION CARRIED. Commissioner Kedrowski was not present at the
time of the motion.
Deb Garross outlined the information on Exhibit 3; Averaging
Setbacks.
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY
COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO DELETE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE
SECTION 5- 4 -1(J) AND PRIOR LAKE ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 83 -6 SECTION
4.1(J) AS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT 3 AS PRESENTED SEPTEMBER 19, 1991.
VA� /
PID1 5- 1 -0
89-1 ?3
Phone
Phone: —
Phone: NNG- S'Fit
Phone: —
Type of Ownership: Fee Contract Purchase Agreement
Consultant /Contractor: (i . ;`c : -:-r ._ i cz Ff¢w L Pho
Existing Use
of Property: P resent Zoning: /7E�rO6.yT
Proposed Use
of Property
Legal Descr
of Variance
Variance Requested: ( ' ('f=R r.4> or
(. polAl,ANPE 17v1)u„e-s 17' F. T o 1LOU+e.Q.,
Has the applicant previously sought to plat, rezone, obtain a v riance or conditional
use permit on the subject site or any part of it? Yes
What was requested:
When: D isposition:
the type of
I .�R. r: c. TP t_!v IAJ C, ' 7 GE
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
(A)Cmpleted application form. (Wiling fee (C)Certified from abstract firm, names
and addresses of property owners within 100 feet of the exterior boundaries of the
subject property. (D)Complete legal description 6 Property Identification Number
(PID). (E)Deed restrictions, if applicable. (F)An area nap at 1 available
from the City Engineering Section showing: existing topography, utilities, lot
boundaries, building easements and soil test data if pertinent within 300 feet.
(G)A parcel map at 1 -50 showing: The site development plan, buildings:
parking, loading, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility service.
ONLY ODMPLETE APPLICATIONS SHALL BE REVIFA= BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
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 Lakc Zoning Ordinance which specifies
requirements for variance procedures. I agree to provide information and follow the
procedures as outlined in the Ordinance. i �_ 17 -Z"4Z4 ¢- --
Submitted this day of A r, 1 9-V
$ -17 Zv 7r9c40
PLANNING ODMMISSION APPROVED _ DENIED 7`: DATE OF HEARING
CITY COUNCIIL APPEAL _ APPROVED _ DENIED DATE OF HEARING
1; ,
t72 Y
Date
89 18
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 7, 1969 PAGE 3
Amendment by Commissioner Loftus, to add to the motion that no
opposition was expressed by the neighbors, failed.
Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Kedrowski, Loftus, Roseth
and Wells. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM III - BRUCE PETERSON - SIDE YARD VARIANCE
Mr. Peterson was not present. Recess called for 5 minutes at
8:15 P.M. Reconvened at 8:20 p.m. Mr. Peterson not present.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO CONTINUE BRUCE PETERSON
VARIANCE UNTIL THE END OF THE AGENDA AND ACT AT THAT TIME.
Randall Ries variance was considered at this time. Mr. Ries said
he would request a 5' south side yard variance and would offset
the new construction from the existing structure- which is
located 4 from the south side property line. Future
additions would be planned so that the entire building will be
5' from the property line. This was agreeable with Mr. 6 Mrs.
Irvine and Staff.
Comments from the Commissioners were, lot is substandard, a one
bedroom home is not adequate, garage location, parking, and
appreciate the fact that the parties involved could work out a
solution.
MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY WELLS, TO GRANT 5' SOUTH SIDE YARD,
4' EAST REAR YARD VARIANCE, AND A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 9.283 AND
9.3B1C OF THE SHORE LAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE FOR 16484 INGUADONA
BEACH CIRCLE, RATIONALE BEING THAT IT IS A SUBSTANDARD LOT WHICH
CREATES A HARDSHIP, IS IN LINE WITH VARIANCES GRANTED IN THE PAST
IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, IS AN EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING HOUSELINE
AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY
AND IN CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE
VARIANCE TO SECTIONS 9.23B AND 9.381C ARE THAT THE LOT IS TAXABLE
AND SEWER AND WATER DOES EXIST TO THE PROPERTY AND APPLICANT
SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD A HOUSE SIMILAR TO OTHER
HOMES WITH SIMILAR LOT RESTRICTIONS.
Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Kedrowski, Loftus, Roseth
and Wells. MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Peterson was present and advised that his application would be
heard at the and of the agenda.
ITEM V - WADE ALLISON - FRONT YARD VARIANCE
Mr. Allison, 4330 Dakota St., presented the alternate design for
a garage that was recommended by the Planning Commission at the
August 17, 1989, showing the garage attached to the westerly side
of the house requesting a 4 west side yard variance.
89 `l8
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 7, 1989 PAGE 4
Deb Garross presented the information as per memo of September 7,
1989. Staff does recognize the efforts of the applicant to
reduce the variance requested but Staff feels that the garage
should be 22X34 therefore, Staff recommended a 2' west side yard
variance be granted instead of the 4' requested.
Comments from the Commissioners; acknowledged efforts of the
applicant, felt that a 2' variance would be better but 4' would
be allowable, maintenance of two driveways, lot area is less
than 10,000 square feet causing a hardship, coverage ratio, and
a contingency on the driveway.
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY WELLS, TO APPROVE 4' WEST SIDE
VARIANCE FOR AN ATTACHED 24 X 34 GARAGE ADDITION AT 4330 DAKOTA
ST., CONTINGENT THAT THE DRIVEWAY EXISTING ON TO DAKOTA BE
ELIMINATED AND THE GARAGE SEALED OFF WITHIN A PERIOD OF TWELVE
MONTHS.
In the discussion following the motion, Commissioner Arnold
expressed concern on the site line impact. Commissioner Loftus
felt it should be recorded that the neighbors voiced no
objections to the alternate plan by Mr. Allison.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Kedrowski, Wells, and
Roseth. May by Arnold. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM VI GUY SELINSKE - HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT
Guy Selinske, 16813 Lyons Ave. stated that he is seeking a home
occupation permit to work out of his home and operate a glass
repair service. The applicant has been working from his home
for the past five years but neglected to apply for a permit.
Deb Garross presented the information as per memo of September 7,
1989. This application was brought to the attention of Staff by
a complaint. Other violations of the complaint have been
satisfied. This occupation is the primary source of income for
the applicant. There are two employees plus Mr. Selinske and his
wife. Staff's recommendation would be to approve the home
occupation permit with the following conditions:
1. The operation be limited to dispatch only.
2. The number of employees be limited to family members and one
glass installer.
3. No exterior signs be allowed to advertise the business.
4. No exterior storage be allowed on site.
5. All repair work be conducted off site.
Chairperson Kedrowski read into the record a letter dated
September 4, 1989, from Gerhard E. Zaudtke, 16803 Lyons Ave.
stating he had no objections to the permit, and a letter dated
8.9.
"VA18P2"
PLANNING REPORT
SUBJECT FRONT YARD VARIANCE APPLICATION
APPLICANT WADE ALLISON
SITE: 4330 DAKOTA STREET S.E.
DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
The Planning Commission considered a variance application from
Wade Allison fora 17' foot front yard variance from West Avenue
on August 17, 1989. Mr. Allison had proposed to build a 32 x 24
foot detached garage 8' feet from the westerly property line of
Lot 1, Block 1, Prior Acres 3rd Addition. The Planning
Commission encouraged the applicant to review alternate design
options for the garage in order to reduce the amount of variance
needed. The revised plan is attached. The applicant has chosen
to attach the garage to the westerly side of the home and is
requesting consideration for a 4' foot west front yard variance.
BACKGROUND:
e su ect site is a corner lot which contains approximately
9,500 square feet. The lot is zoned R -1 /S -D and the required
setbacks are 25 feet from the south and west property lines and
10 feet from the north and east property lines. Mr. Allison
wishes to convert an existing tuck under garage into living space
and add an attached garage on the westerly side of the existing
home.
DEVELOPMENT ISSUES:
The Planning Commission was concerned with the original garage
location due to the proximity of the structure to the road and
that site lines for traffic would likely be impaired. Reactions
from the neighborhood were generally negative and concern was
expressed for traffic safety as well as the aesthetic impact on
the neighborhood.
The attached map illustrates the location proposed for the
attached garage as well as the location of four homes to the
north of the subject site. It is evident that structures located
along West Avenue in the immediate vicinity of the subject site,
maintain a consistent setback from the roadway. A discussion
with the Building Official revealed that typical garage length
ranges from 22 to 26 feet.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612)4474230 / Fax !6121 4474245
A site analysis was conducted by staff, where it was found that
the proposal would not be consistent with the development
patterns of the neighborhood. The applicant has use of an
existing garage, even though it is not as large of a storage
space as he would like. Staff would find it difficult to find
bardship to substantiate granting a variance to this site. The
subject site is not unique and no evidence has been presented to
demonstrate that a hardship exists. Perhaps the applicant should
explore other alternatives to increase the living space of the
existing home in a manner which does not require setback
variances.
STAFF RECOtM1ENDATION:
TAB recommendation from staff is to deny the variance on the
basis that the subject site is not unique with respect to other
lots within the neighborhood; the proposed garage would not
observe the spirit of the ordinance; the variance requested is
extreme (68% variance); and the proposed location and setback
would not be consistent with existing development patterns in the
neighborhood.
89 - 18
E V ISE D PRO POSHL
`�
1 m
PAOPER v L,N L_ .
_ Arn • , JS2 .
I I
JET. DPLic / � � {QROVND
I
Nut-
4�VRRiRNCE .
i
171tNew�4 1`tr 34' .
I
I
I 4aoo rl eeac 14u 4�L
j
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1989
The August 17, 1989, Prior Lake Planning Commission was called to
order by Vice- Chairperson Arnold at 7:35 P.M. Present were
Commissioners Loftus, Arnold, Wells, Roseth, Director of Planning
Horst Graser, and Assistant City Planner Deb Garross.
ITEM I - REVIEW MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
Commissioner Wells commented that the wording in paragraph three
of ITEM III should be amended to read " and water problem would
be solved ".
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO APPROVE MINUTES AS
AMENDED.
Vote taken signified ayes by Commissioners Loftus and Roseth.
Commissioners Wells and Arnold abstained as they were not present
at the August 3, 1989, meeting.
ITEM II - WADE ALLISON - FRONT YARD VARIANCE
Wade Allison, 4330 Dakota Street S.E., stated that he is
requesting a 17' west front yard variance to build a garage and
to convert the existing garage to living space. A larger garage
is needed to park and store the vehicles he owns.
Deb Garross presented the information as per the memo of August
17, 1989. Staff recommendation is to deny the request as the
subject site is not unique with other lots in the neighborhood,
the proposed garage would not observe the spirit of the
ordinance, the variance requested is extreme, and the proposed
location and setback would not be consistent with the existing
development patterns in the neighborhood.
Tom Faust, 16051 West Ave. S.E., and Ed Bennett, 16031 West Ave.
S.E., objected to the variance as they felt the building would
cause a traffic hazard when backing out of their driveways. Mr.
Graser reported for the record a telephone call from Keith
Torkelson, owner of the vacant lot at the intersection of West
Ave. and County Road 21, stating that he also objected to the
variance.
Comments from the Commissioners were on, building an attached
garage, change the dimensions of the garage, property size,
extreme coverage ratio, poor traffic visibility, and driveway
parking.
MOTION BY WELLS, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO TABLE THE APPLICATION OF
WADE ALLISON AT 4330 DAKOTA ST. S.E., FOR A 17 FOOT VARIANCE
UNTIL APPLICANT HAS REDESIGNED PROJECT AND SUBMITTED PLANS TO
STAFF.
Vote taken signified ayes by Commissioners Loftus, Wells, Arnold
and Roseth. MOTION CARRIED.
4629 Dakota St. SE. P9 Lake Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474235
1 0
"VA18PC"
PLANNING REPORT
SUBJECT FRONT YARD VARIANCE APPLICATION
APPLICANT WADE ALLISON
SITE: 4330 DAKOTA STREET S.E.
DATE: AUGUST 17, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
The Planning Department has received a variance application from
Wade Allison to consider a 17' foot front yard variance from West
Avenue. Mr. Allison has proposed to build a 32 x 24 foot
detached garage 8' feet from the westerly property line of Lot 1,
Block 1, Prior Acres 3rd Addition.
BACKGROUND:
The t site is a corner lot which contains approximately
9,500 square feet. The lot is zoned R -1 /S -D and the required
setbacks are 25 feet from the south and west property lines and
10 feet from the north and east property lines. Mr. Allison
wishes to convert an existing tuck under garage into living space
and add a detached garage on the northwest corner of the
property.
DEVELOPMENT ISSUES:
The attachecT map is a drawing prepared by the City Engineering
Department. The map illustrates the location proposed for the
detached garage as well as the location of four homes to the
north of the subject site. It is evident that structures located
along West Avenue in the immediate vicinity of the subject site,
maintain a consistent setback from the roadway.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
When t —application for variance was first discussed, it was
thought by the applicant that there was enough lot area to locate
the cjaracye 12 feet from the property line. Staff reviewed
possibilities of reducing the length of the garage from 32 to 22
feet in order to reduce the degree of variance needed. However,
once the proposal was drawn to scale, it was discovered that
there was much less area available to the westerly side of the
home and that an extreme variance would be needed in order to
construct the garage as proposed.
4629 Dakota St. Sf- Prior lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax(612)447-4245
89-18
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has use of an existing garage, even though it is
not as large of a storage space as he would like. Staff is not
able to find a hardship concerning this property. The subject
site is not unique and no evidence has been presented to
demonstrate that a hardship exists. However, staff does recognize
the efforts of the applicant to reduce the amount of variance
from 17 to 4 feet. It is the recommendation of staff that the
length of the garage be reduced from 24 to 22 feet, reducing the
variance from 4 to a 2 foot west front yard variance for the
subject site. The addition of a 22 x 34 foot garage would bring
the coverage ratio to 218 percent for the subject site.
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
v (/ \ ) ` 121,7 1 1891 1991
"VA20PC"
PLANNING REPORT
SUBJECT: LAKESHORE VARIANCE
APPLICANT: DAVID RUBENZER
SITE ADDRESS: 14085 GREENWAY AVENUE
PRESENTER: DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER
PUBLIC HEARING: YES X NO
DATE: DECEMBER 5, 1991
HISTORY /BACKGROUND
The Planning Department has received a variance application from
David Rubenzer to consider a 50' foot variance from the required
75' Lakeshore setback. The applicant proposes to build a single
family home as per attached survey. The subject site consists of
Lots 7 and 8, Block 1, The Harbor West. The home proposed would
constitute approximately less than 20% lot coverage for the
subject site.
PREVIOUS PROPOSALS:
The subject site was subdivided and received final plat approval
from the City Council on December 12, 1982. A staff memo with
the file indicates that at the time of subdivision, it was
recognized that the 75' lakeshore setback could not be met for
part of the plat.
PHYSIOGRAPHY:
The i ste contains over 15,000 square feet of land area above the
904 elevation, which is compliant with current Shoreland
Management lot area standards. However, due to its location
adjacent to the channel, the property is of irregular shape with
the 904 encroaching upon the east and south parts of the parcel.
The lot is low however, the survey indicates that the structure
will be placed in accordance with the 909 flood plain elevation
required by the City's Flood Plain Ordinance.
ADJACENT USES:
Theca j - scent properties are developed with single family homes.
The Conroy's Bay subdivision is located to the west, The Harbor
West subdivision is located to the north and the property located
across the street from the subject site is currently vacant.
RECOMMENDATION
The recommendation from staff is to approve the 50' foot setback
variance as requested. The lot was created in 1982 with the
rec,gnition that variances would be needed in order to provide a
building envelope for the property. The lot is an irregular
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
shape with the 904 encroaching upon the east and south property
lines. As such, there is no building envelope on the subject
site where a structure could be placed to meet current zoning
standards. In addition, the neighborhood is virtually fully
developed therefore, it is not likely that this variance would
set a negative precedent for future development. The Conroy's
Bay subdivision is an old plat that contains many homes at
variance with the 75' setback standard. The hardship is not
caused by the property owner but rather is the result of the
ordinance and actions of the City of Prior Lake. The variance
observes the spirit of the ordinance and would not be detrimental
to the health and welfare of the community.
Z
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
(A)Completed application form. (B)Filing fee. (C)Property Survey,, (D)Certified f ran -
abstract firm, names and addresses of property owners within 100 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the subject property. (E)Complete legal description e
Property Identification Number C(PID); (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if
applicable. (G)A parcel map at 1 "- 20' -50' showing: The site development plan,
buildings: parking, loading, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility
service.
ONLY COMPLETE APPLICATIONS SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING- COMMISSION.
1b 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
reguirements for variance procedures. I agree to providenformation and follow the
procedures as outlined in the Ordinance. X I /1l„ 11ey"f9l/
Silmitted this day of NQq . 19 I I
Owners Signature
THIS SPACE IS TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR
PLANNING COMMISSION _ APPROVED _ DENIED
CITY COUNCIL APPEAL _ APPROVED _ DENIED
DATE OF HEARING
DATE OF HEARING
CONDITIONS•
Signature of the Planning Director
Late
PIDt �zA -,2 IQ -In 7 - 0
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
34 0719 - U 0 P- O
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
//
ca
Applint: `Q ,�.1l 44c,t 1 c C
Hone Phone: 49l - /E yG
Address: i
Phone:
Property Owner:
Hone Phone: /gr /.176
Address: wn.7_/ !':.,e._ i <E
hbrk Phone: , i'.-90 °,t
Type of Ownership: ee Contract
Purchase Agreement
Consultant /Contractor: 7A T c, i
Phone: 1 176 oa'1 7
Existing Use 1 {/
�RQOiI[U�Irf
!'CS
of Property: C ' 7 � / / — 9
resent Zoning:
� t4JQM
Proposed Use 7T l' ,
of Property: 7'� c �
Legal Description 1 X 7 /iC
l d y, �� >c
s-
/{Pc u�
of Variance Site / Z c
�
�� '`
Variance Requested: % •'2/ c� i
-Cc•�
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
� No
What was requested:
When: Disposition•
Describe the type of improvements proposed:
Z
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
(A)Completed application form. (B)Filing fee. (C)Property Survey,, (D)Certified f ran -
abstract firm, names and addresses of property owners within 100 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the subject property. (E)Complete legal description e
Property Identification Number C(PID); (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if
applicable. (G)A parcel map at 1 "- 20' -50' showing: The site development plan,
buildings: parking, loading, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility
service.
ONLY COMPLETE APPLICATIONS SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING- COMMISSION.
1b 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
reguirements for variance procedures. I agree to providenformation and follow the
procedures as outlined in the Ordinance. X I /1l„ 11ey"f9l/
Silmitted this day of NQq . 19 I I
Owners Signature
THIS SPACE IS TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR
PLANNING COMMISSION _ APPROVED _ DENIED
CITY COUNCIL APPEAL _ APPROVED _ DENIED
DATE OF HEARING
DATE OF HEARING
CONDITIONS•
Signature of the Planning Director
Late
§§
k)
k 2
k K
H-1
(� 7|
|�] §�
�
%
mw
\§!�
.
2
aJ
•__ �mm. _
.
FD...H. �a_ c#nurN ~'
James R. Q
\ \ ' -'
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
M E M O R A N D U M
TO . PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: STAFF
RE . HARBOR WEST - PRELIMINARY PLAT
DATE: JUNE 4, 1981
~ The proposed plat calls for the platting of four single family lots. Lots 1 -3 meet the
requirements for size and width. Lot 4 is in the flood plan and would require large amounts
of fill. Lakeshore set back of 7S' could not be met and would reauira a 35' variance
Sewer and water abut the property. Laterals would have to be extended to service the
plat. Both sewer and water must be in the right -of -way. The attachment shows sewer service
at the bottom of the lots.
The grades for the road as proposed are acceptable. A ten foot cut is necessery to realize
these grades. The temporary cul -de -sac must be eliminated and provisions made for through
traffic. The topography in this plat is extremely steep. The development of the area
west of this proposal has not been addressed. This proposal must address the potential
development of this area in terms of traffic circulation and utilities.
The developer has not addressed storm water management and typical street sections.
Staff requests this item be tabled until July 2nd at 8:30 P.M. The developer is requested
to resubmit plan outlining the -aforementioned deficiencies.
(812) 447.4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 359 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106
FILE NO
December 2, 1991
Ms. Deb Garross
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RFC
O.?, .
PRicr�.
RE: RUBENZER SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST, LOTS 7 & 8, BLOCK 1, THE
HARBOR WEST, LOWER PRIOR LAKE ( #70 -26)
Dear Ms. Garross:
I have received the materials you sent regarding the subject
variance request. They reached my office on November 25, 1991. On
November 19th David Nygren faxed me a plan similar to that which
you sent. The two drawings appear identical, with the exception of
the structure setback depicted at the southeast corner of the
proposed structure. On the plan faxed to me the setback was 23.6'
from the 904.0 contour. On the drawing you sent me, it indicates
a 25 setback. I scaled it off on the plan you sent and it appears
to be 23.6 ±. I do not see evidence that the structure has been
moved, or the dimensions physically changed on the plan. Only the
numbers shown on the plan were changed. This should be addressed.
During my discussion with the building contractor (Dave Nygren) it
was brought to my attention that the portion of the proposed
structure on the southeast corner of the house is to be a hot tub
or something similar. Does this meet the hardship test as defined
by Minnesota Statute, Chapter 394? If the city finds the hot tub
a necessary function of the home, I recommend the applicant
relocate it to the south end of the home. Assuming the dimensions
of the hot tub area would be the same, it could be located on the
south end of the structure and maintain at least a 35' setback.
A condition of a variance granted should include requirements for
erosion control during construction, and a revegetation plan,
including trees or shrubs which would partially shield the
structure from view from the lake.
Does their plan include a deck? I will strongly oppose any future
variance request for a deck on this lot. This should be made clear
to the applicant, and incorporated into the minutes of the hearing.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Ms. Garross
December 2, 1991
Page Two (2)
Lastly, it appears that the lot will have to be raised to ensure
any structure on the property meets the requirements of floodplain
zoning. The lowest floor of any structure, including crawl space,
must be at least one foot higher than the loo -year flood elevation
of Prior Lake.
In summary, Lots 7 and 8 are marginFlly developable. I oppose the
variance as proposed. I would acc %pt moving the southeast portion
of the structure to the south. I will not approve of any deck in
the future, should application be made.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Please call
if you have any questions. As always, keep me advised of the
outcome of this hear'ng.
Sincerely,
r
Pa�r k .. Lyn III
Area Hydrologist
PJL /kka:rubenzer.vpl
tr STATE OF
D OF NATURAL RESOURCES
METRO WATERS, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 551066.
PHONE No. 772_7910
7�
November 27, 1991
Ms. Deb Garross
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: VARIANCE REQUEST, WADE ALLISON, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, PRIOR ACRES
3RD ADDITION, SCOTT COUNTY
Dear Ms. Garross:
I have received and reviewed the materials you forwarded regarding
the subject variance request.
I assume there was justification for requiring removal of the
driveway when the variance was issued. As such, the condition
should be met. From a shoreland zoning perspective, it would be
desirable to have the driveway removed and seeded or sodded. This
would reduce the impervious coverage of the lot and the runoff from
it. If leaving the driveway results in the percentage of
impervious coverage exceeding 25 %, I would strongly encourage the
drive to be removed.
Please keep me informed as to the outcome of the hearing regarding
this matter.
1 erely„
Patrick J. L nch III
Area Hydrolo ist
PJL /kka:acrell27.pj1
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
PRI
\� I NV
HERITAGE
1891
REGULAR PLANNING OOMMISSION MEETING
AGENDA
DECEMBER 19, 1991
7:30 P.M.
7:30 P.M.
7:30 P.M.
7:45 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
COMMUNITY
1991
REVIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING
V DRIDGE ESTATES
REZONING
JOSEPH MAHOM/
MIKE GILES
HEARING
* Indicates a Public Hearing
DOUGLAS THEILBAR
All times stated on the Planning Cotmn9ssion Agenda, with the exception of Public
Hearings, are approximate and may start later than the scheduled time.
4629 Dakota St. S.E, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447 -4230 / Fax (612) 447 -4245
� i v
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY 9 ✓J.':Q 1
1991 -209
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 5, 1991
The December 5, 1991, Planning Commission Meeting was called to
order by Chairman Loftus at 7:30 P.M. Those present were
Commissioners Loftus, Arnold, Roseth, Director of Planning Horst
Graser, Assistant City Planner Deb Garross, and Secretary Rita
Schewe. Commissioner Wells arrived at 7:35 P.M.
ITEM I - REVIEW M OF PREVIOUS MEETING
MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS
WRITTEN.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Arnold, and Roseth. MOTION
CARRIED.
ITEM II - PUBLIC HEARING - 2000 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT -
COUNTY ROAD 18 POLICIES - TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER
Public Hearing was called to order by Chairman Loftus at 7:35
P.M. The public was in attendance.
Horst Graser introduced David Unmacht, city Manager, who
presented political and planning information on the 2000
Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the County Road 18 proposed
policies. Progress on the bridge construction, ramp, and loop
exits were discussed. The Metropolitan Council denied the paving
of the ramp and exit, rational being that it would urbanize the
area prematurely. Certain conditions were given to the City of
Prior Lake, City of Savage, City of Shakopee, and Scott County,
in order to safeguard against urbanization. Prior Lake has met
most of the criteria and will present it to the Metropolitan
Council in January of 1992 in anticipation of overturning their
decision on the non - paveing of the ramp and exit.
Horst Graser gave a presentation on the building phases of County
Road 18. The concern that Metropolitan Council has is that by
allowing urban type of traffic to exit into the rural area would
cause communities to rezone and prematurely develop. It was
decided by the Metropolitan Council that in order to have the
loop and the access ramp paved, the communities in northern Scott
County including the County had to safeguard certain land use
patterns and practices.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 5, 1991 PAGE 2
The transportation section of the Comprehensive Plan has been
rewritten and will contain the amendment. Prior Lake will
develop in an orderly and planned fashion. The policy statements
were read that will be adopted by the City. These policies will
limit driveway and highway access to the Bloomington Ferry Bridge
and Shakopee By -Pass.
LEO Vierling, 14091 Eagle Creek Ave. NE, stated that not all of
the driveways going into his property were shown on the map.
Larry Brastad, 13755 Crest Ave. NE, questioned location of a
service road.
Comments from the Commissioners were on; changes are adequate for
the Metropolitan Council, time frame for paving the ramp and
loop, would there be a moratorium on zoning, and all were in
favor of the amendment.
MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY
COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENTS AS PROPOSED WITH THE MAP
AS EXHIBIT A TO SHOW THE ADDITIONAL ROAD ACCESSES TO THE LEO
VIERLING FARM.
Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Roseth, wells, and Loftus.
MOTION CARRIED.
Public Hearing closed at 8:30 P.M.
ITEM III - WADE ALLISON VARIANCE AMENDMENT
Deb Garross presented the information as per memo of December 5,
1991. The applicant is requesting the Planning Commission to
delete the condition to remove the driveway as stated in Variance
89 -18. A letter from Pat Lynch of the DNR, dated November 27,
1991, stated that he assumed there was justification for
requiring removal of the driveway when the variance was issued,
as such, the condition should be met. The coverage ratio for
the site is 30% in the shoreland district, the applicant's lot is
38 %. If the driveway is removed as specified in the 1989
variance the coverage ratio would be reduced to 26 %. A
drainage issue was voiced by an abutting neighbor. Gary Staber,
Building Official, conducted a site inspection on the Busse
property at 4350 Dakota Street and deter that the drainage
problem is not associated to the garage addition but in part to a
retaining wall construction. In Mr. Staber's opinion, the
drainage problem could be improved if the Allison driveway were
removed and fill added adjacent to the Busse home.
The recommendation from Staff is to enforce the conditions of
Variance 89 -18 as approved by the Commissioners. There are no
circumstances which have changed since the variance approval and
the drainage issue could be alleviated, in part, if the driveway
was removed.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 5, 1991 PAGE 3
Wade Allison, 4330 Dakota Street, stating he is requesting the
Commissioners to rescind their decision to have his driveway
removed as per his variance application 89 -18. The applicant
distributed pictures showing his property. A letter from the
former owner, Ted Paul, Watertown, South Dakota, was read by the
applicant informing him the water problem had always been there
and that the driveway' did help the drainage. Mr. Allison stated
he wishes to retain the driveway for convenience and play area
for his children.
Comments from the Commissioners were on; design of the garage,
status of tuckunder garage, storage area, compromise was made to
allow the applicant to have the garage on the original variance,
and all were in agreement not to change the condition.
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY WELLS, TO REAFFIRM THE CONDITION
STATED IN THE ORIGINAL MOTION OF VARIANCE 89 -18 THAT THE EXISTING
DRIVEWAY BE REMOVED BUT DUE TO THE MISUNDERSTANDING BY THE
APPLICANT AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION AND CURRENT WEATHER
CONDITIONS, THE APPLICANT IS ALLOWED UNTIL JUNE 30, 1992, TO
REMOVE THE DRIVEWAY.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Wells, Arnold, and Loftus.
MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM IV - DAVID RUBENZER - VARIANCE
David Nygren contractor, representing the applicant, David
Rubenzer of 14024 Rutger's St. N.E., stated they are requesting
a 50 foot variance from the required 75 foot lakeshore setback to
build a single family home. A variance is required due to the
size of the subject site. The home was scaled down to request
the least possible variance.
Deb Garross presented the information as the memo of December 5,
1991. The :subject site is Lots 7 6 8, a-id is irregular shaped
with the 904 encroaching on the east and south sides of the
parcel. At the time of platting in 1982, it was recognized that
the 75 foot lakeshore variance could not be met. Staff's
recommendation is to approve the variance as requested as there
is no building envelope on the subject site where a structure
could be placed to meet current zoning standards and the
neighborhood is fully developed and would not set a precedent for
future development. The hardship is not caused by the applicant
but rather is the result of the ordinance and actions of the City
of Prior Lake.
Dean Brown, 6450 Conroy St. NE, questioned the elevation of the
lot and was concerned on lot 7 and his ability to enter and exit
from his driveway.
David Rubenzer, 14024 Rutgers St. explained the proposed location
of his driveway on lot 7 and the location of an easement.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 5, 1991 PAGE 4
Mike Ryan, 6442 Conroy St. questioned street location and wanted
the 30 feet returned that was lost to them when platted.
Caryn Ryan, 6442 Conroy St. wanted to know the width and
definition of a street. Also complained on stakes in road. She
was advised the stakes were used by the surveyor to locate lot
lines.
Comments from the Commissioners were on; issue of driveway is
civil matter, erosion control, lot is unbuildable without a
variance, maintain setbacks, additional fill brought in, hardship
is evident, and no one was opposed to the variance.
MOTION BY WELLS, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO APPROVE A 50 FOOT LAKESHORE
VARIANCE FOR 14085 GREENWAY AVENUE AND THAT THE SURVEY SHOWN BE
ENTERED INTO THE RECORD AS THE SITE PLAN. JUSTIFICATION BEING
THAT IT IS A UNIQUE SITUATION, THE LOT IS IRREGULAR SHAPED THAT
REQUIRES A VARIANCE, IT DOES NOT SET A PRECEDENT, IS IN CHARACTER
WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE APPLICANT DID NOT CREATE THE HARDSHIP
AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALPH AND WELFARE OF THE
COMMUNITY.
Vote taken signified ayes by Wells, Roseth, Loftus, and Arnold.
MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Graser advised the Commissioners that the workshop with the
Council has been postponed to February 1.
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY WELLS, TO ADJOURN MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Wells, Arnold, and Loftus.
MOTION CARRIED.
Meeting adjourned at 10:10 P.M. Tapes of meeting on file at City
Hall.
Horst W. Graser Rita M. SChewe
Director of Planning Recording Secretary
wRo�j�
v
n�
T
"RZ01PCrr
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
HERITAGE COMMUNITY 9541;x_1
1891 1991 2041
PLANNING REPORT
CONSIDER REZONING APPLICATION FOR NEW CENTURY
CONSTRUCTION
JOE MAHONEY AND MIKE GILES
DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER
X YES NO
DECEMBER 19, 1991
HISTORY /BACKGROUND
The purpose of this public hearing is to consider a rezoning
application for Woodridge Estates. See attached map for subject
site location. The site consists of approximately seventy acres
of vacant land located adjacent to and directly west of "The
Pond" athletic complex. The requested action is to rezone the
site from A -1 Agricultural to R -1 Residential.
PREVIOUS PROPOSALS:
The rezoning was approved by the Planning Commission on June 20,
1991 and by the City Council on August 5, 1991. The Council
approved the rezoning subject to (1) Metropolitan Council
approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and (2) a Sunshine
Date of November 15, 1991 be incorporated which will give the
Metropolitan Council slightly more than 90 days to approve the
Comprehensive Plan, at which time the rezoning would become
valid. If the Metropolitan Council does not approve the Plan
Amendment by November 15, 1991 the rezoning would be declared
null and void.
The Metropolitan Council review of a Comprehensive Plan
amendment to incorporate the subject si into the Urban Service
Area and to change the Land Use Designat i from Agricultural to
Low Density Residential is still under6y. Staff anticipates
that a decision will be forthcoming from the Metropolitan Council
by January 1991. Staff is under the impression that the Met
Council will approve the amendment. However, the sunshine date
placed upon the rezoning application has expired. Therefore, the
request is to again, rezone the site from A -1 Agricultural to R -1
Urban Residential.
RECOMMENDATION:
T ee recommendation from staff is to approve the rezoning
application as requested subject to Metropolitan Council approval
of the Urban Service Area expansion and change of land use
designation from Agricultural to Low Density Residential. The
developer has been granted preliminary plat approval of a single
family subdivision on the site, The zoning should be changed to
accommodate anticipated development on the subject site.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Mirmesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447 -4230 / Fax (612) 447 -4245
Minutes of the Prior Lake City Council September 3, 1991
Items 5 thru 7 were bypassed in order to go directly to item A8:
Lake%on
Consider Approval of Bid Award for Project 91 -14 Lakefront Park
Pa'+k
Trails and Resolution 91 -37. Assistant City Engineer Loney
T4at -i
presented a map of the proposed trail system and reported the
(fide
results of the bid opening for paving trails in Lakefront Park.
The low total bid base and alternate of $69,690.25 was submitted
by Prior Lake Blacktop. Resident Dorothy Watzl, 15608 Red Oaks
Road, expressed concern regarding the proposed handicapped y-cess
trail to the Lakefront Park beach area. Ms. Watzl also requested
that City Manager Unmacht meet with Dave Watzl to discuss the
issue in more detail, and whether there had been a written
agreement between the City of Prior Lake and Watzl's on the road
to the beach area. Irene Abrahamson, 4696 Rutledge Street,
addressed the Council concerning traffic on Red Oaks, snowmobile
use in the park and signs t0 direct people to parking areas.
Extensive discussion occurred on all of the issues brought up by
Ms. Abrahamson and Ms. Watzl.
MOTION MADE BY LARSON, SECONDED BY FITZGERALD, TO APPROVE RS 91 -37
RESOLUTION 91 -37 ACCEPTING BID FOR PROJECT NO. 91 -14 (LAKEFRONT 13id
PARK TRAILS). 104
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson, Scott LakelAo^
and White, the motion passed unanimously. Park
T 2ai.(n
Council directed staff to research solutions to the snowmobile
issue and present a plan prior to this winter. Loney stated that
the trail construction would start within two weeks after the
contracts are signed.
The next portion of Agenda Item $8 was: Consider Request of John )ohn
and Meda Kop. Meda Kop addressed the Council with a request that a,d
the City consider naming a portion of the trails located within mach Kop
Lakefront Park "Kop Trail ". A short discussion occurred on the 4egaeet
location of the trails to determine which area the Kops had in
mind when making the request. Council directed staff to look
into naming the trails in Lakefront Park.
The next order of business was: Consider Action to Establish F14e
Fire Hall Referendum. City Manager Unmacht gave a brief update Ha,U
on the status of the issue as outlined in his memorandum of
September 3, 1991. Fire Chief, Al Borchardt, briefly discussed
the findings of the Land Acquisition, Building and Equipment
Committees. Discussion occurred on whether to put the equipment
purchases on the referendum or to purchase the equipment with
Equipment Certificates. Council directed staff to draw up a list
of pros and cons and present them on September 16.
A short recess was called.
The meeting reconvened at 9:50 p.m.
The next order of business was: Consider Preliminary Plat of wood Ric
Wood Ridge Estates. Attorney Tim Keane presented a map of the E,tate4
proposed plat and discussed details of his Letter of Intent dated
August 28, 1991, which identified additional design and open
space issues agreed to by staff and the developer within the Wood
Ridge Estates preliminary plat.
Minutes of the Prior Lake City Council September 3, 1991
Keane also discussed details with regard to the following: The
proposed trail system, minimized grading levels, tree pplantings,
erosion control, sewer and water connections, bermings, and
amount of land designated to park dedication. City Planner
Graser discussed the Metropolitan Council's request with regard
to the City's urban service area expansion application.
Discussion occurred on the recommended tree cover requirements,
purpose of Wood View Court and Ridge View Court drainage and
utility easements and the turn - around and whether it sets a
precedent for utilizing someone else's property to facilitate
their plat. Council expressed a desire that there be a clear cut
differentiation between the trail
and private property.
Additional discussion occurred regarding
the placement of the
proposed five foot trail next to Lot 1, Block 3 and when the
final construction should occur. Staff suggested that the trail
could be eight feet instead of five feet. Council concurred.
Staff assured Council that the City's policy with regard to
retention of natural features and trails around a body of water
would be considered during construction.
p!(eC.nunL
MOTION MADE BY FITZGERALD, SECOND BY WHITE, TO APPROVE THE
pi
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WOOD RIDGE ESTATES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE CONTINGENCY THAT THE PATH AROUND
THE POND BE WIDENED TO EIGHT FEET PAST LOT 1, BLACK 3.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson, Scott
and white, the motion passed unanimously.
The next order of business was: Consider adoption of the 1992 -96
CYP
Capital Improvement Program. Council concurred that staff should
19911S2
place this item on the agenda for September 16.
The next order of business was: Staff Report on Status of the
tnivid
Enivid /Super Valu Projects. City Manager Unmacht reported on the
Supea Va
status of the agreement on the Development Contract between the
paoJec.t
EDA and Enivid. Unmacht also stated that Super Valu has
State
submitted a preliminary plat and staff will be meeting on it this
week.
Topics discussed under other Business is as follows:
-- City Manager Unmacht presented a letter from the VFW WW
regarding their request for an Outdoor Concert permit for the
Firemen's Chicken Fry on Sunday, September S. Discussion
occurred regarding outdoor concerts and the possibility of
Council reconsidering the ordinance as it now is written.
Additional comments occurred on recent outdoor concerts and
problems associated with them. Mayor Andren questioned as to
whether the bar owners had met for the purpose of coming up
with a solution on policing and monitoring the outdoor
concerts they sponsor as they had indicated they would be
doing. Council concurred that due to the 30 day notice
requirement, they could not set a precedent in this case by
granting the permit. A short discussion occurred on raising
the fee and implementing stricter enforcement of the
pR,o
J T.
T
� t
. E0
HERITAGE COMMUNrry 99J-W-
1891 1991 2091
AGENDA NUMBER: 7
PREPARED BY: HORST W. GRASER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
SUBJECT: CONSIDER PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WOOD RIDGE
ESTATES
DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 1991
INTRODUCTION: The developers, Joe Mahoney and Michael Giles,
have petitioned the Council for preliminary
plat approval for Wood Ridge Estates.
BACKGROUND: The 70 acre subject site has been in the
foreground of both the Planning Commission and
Council calendars for the past year and a
half. Initially the property was annexed into
the City and subsequently rezoned and brought
into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
The preliminary plat was filed with Staff on
May 17, 1991. In accordance with Section
6 -3 -3 (B) 1, the Council must approve or
disapprove the preliminary plat by September
14, 1991, or agree to an extension of the
review period with the applicant.
The Planning Commission considered this
development for about three (3) months before
recommending preliminary plat approval at a
special meeting on August 23, 1991. The
outstanding issues were resolved at that
meeting and confirmed in a letter of
understanding drafted by the develope
attorney, Tim Keane. The Planning Commision
approved the preliminary plat on the
conditions incorporated in the letter. The
letter of understanding dated August 28, 1991,
is attached. Staff and the developers worked
hard to resolve outstanding issues on the
preliminary plat.
Over the course of the past three (3) months,
Staff has had significant input into the
design and arrangement of lots and open space.
Based on the conditions incorporated in the
attached letter of understanding, Staff
recommends preliminary plat approval.
Within the review period, Staff has
identified additional design and open space
issues in wood Ridge Estates which contributed
to the letter of understanding that will be
presented in detail at the Council hearing
Tim Keane will be prepared to discuss the
development and letter of understanding.
Attached to your packet of information are
existing conditions and data that have been
complied for purposes of providing an insight
into the developers design and layout.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the preliminary plat as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
a. Deny the preliminary plat.
r. Continue the preliminary plat for
additional detail.
RECONNENDATION: Planning Commission and Staff recommend
Alternative Number 1.
ACTION REQUIRED: Depends on Council discussion.
LARKIN, Horrx^N. DALT & 1.IYDoRKN. LT D.
•f <OIlM La• Of <Ow
r400 tCIrC< a, I.A <OV<.
pOOY M•Ow, ,.u.«OV aMT
•f LLln ].! -4 U p)4.400
I.I tt4.3313
!N 4•w r. YY.. Iat(tl
. H.Y.[..YO �[•
r N.P
•Ha % , V <,h a.
` �hHq
a. Pv
uU•
JNf
: <af
.t .Y
August 28, 1991
Reply to Bloomington
Mr. David Unmacht, City Administrator
Mr. Worst Graser, City Planner
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota S.C.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Res Woodridge Estates First Addition
Preliminary Plat
Gentlemen)
MM•ra _
This letter iz; intended to cenfirn underetendinge reached in meeting-
with City staff and the developers in the above - referenced project
regarding the resolution of issues relating to preliminary plat
approval of the Woodridge Estates 1st Addition. This letter also
confirms modifications to the preliminary plat and this understanding
as recoamneded by the Prior Lake Planning Commission at its meeting of
August 22, 1991.
Grading Plan nd vegetation It is agreed and understood that the
developer will mass grade the roads and drainage improvements.
Because it is beneficial to the preservation of existing
vegetation, the wooded home sites will be graded by the individual
home building contractors consistent with the overall grading plan
and city.
Pond Trail The pocid trail will be included as an element in the
development plan with the area dedicated for park as indicated on
the preliminary plat. The pond trail will be a five foot walkway
with design and construction of the trail to be conducted by the
LARx1N, HOT1'MAN. TIwLY do LINvowrN, i
City of Prior Lake
August 20, 1991
!'d01.1 - - --
City of Prior Lake Parks Department. The temporary turn- around
for Pond view Trail will be located west of the preliminary plat
on the - Stassen• property. Lot 1, Block 3 will not be deleted
from the development plan. The developer and staff will agree
upon suitable screening for the rear portion of that lot.
The developer will provide an additional triangular portion to the
rear side of Lots 0 and 9, Block 3. Lot 9 may be widened up to an
additional 20 feet to compensate for the shallow depth. The
resulting lot dimension of Lot 9 will be 90' south, 90' west, 120'
north, 140' east. The trail will be constructed at the time
recommended and deemed appropriate by City staff.
3. nushtown Roae � . Rather than a berm, developer will install
additional screening to consist of a minimum of five coniferous
trees, balled and burlapped, and at least six feet in height to be
planted across the rear of each of the lots in Block 13.
4.
B ..A Pie ^t 1 703h .S2reet. Developer agrees to
construction of a berm a minimum four feet in height planted with
a minimum four coniferous trees per lot, each balled and burlapped
and at least six feet in height. Prior to construction of the
berm, staff and developer will most in the field to confirm actual
berm height. The berm will be constructed with a slope not to
exceed 4s1.
5. Ruff between Block 1 a nd- B7 (' p i strict Staff and
developer agreed that the existing vegetation on the north side of
Block 1 is of sufficient density that no additional screening is
required.
6. Slopes over Z04 Lot 30, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 12 will be
modified so that slopes over 201 will be retained as much as
possible. The park trail lying east of Shenandoah Trail shall be
graded to a slope not to exceed 91.
7. ^a ->< �T -t' 1 r e ^� ^tio� h rw n Block 4 and -Block ...9 • The rear
corners of Lot 16, Block 4 and Lot 7, Block 6 will be reconfigured
to provide a minimum 50 foot corridor to accommodate the
park /trail.
8.
r Developer concurs with staff
recommendation for variance.
9. Pondview Trail T m racy uW , Developer agrees to provide
easement document for temporary turn - around for Pondview Trail
cul -de -sac prior to final plat approval.
LARxIN. HorvmAN. T)AI.Y & 1.IN13r:REN. LTD.
City of Prior Lake
August 20, 1991
Pace 3
10. AdUwst lo line wm n ts _3_ and 4. Alock '+ Developer agrees
with recommendation.
11. Planting and__y ram P Plan Developer agrees each lot planting
plan will be in compliance with the Code.
12. Park Dedication Regulr m n . Developer agrees to provide cash in
lieu of land dedication for the difference in computation between
the 6.9 acres and the approximately 6.3 to 6.5 included on the
preliminary plat on the basis of raw land value of $7,500 or park
dedication of $750 per acre.
1;li IN -RING Itt {jE$
st --two -er n- n v, cr .A : "�A' Fr�
$_tormsewer and Drainage Report Staff will be working with the
developer's engineer to determine the design of the stormsewer
plan.
Minh pater Elevation Staff will work with developer's engineer
to confirm pond overflow elevation and minimum building elevation.
Erosion Co ntrol. Staff will work with developer's engineer to
determine the design of sedementation basins. Erosion control
silt fence plans will be provided in two phases. The first will
reflect the silt fence plan for the mass grading plan. The second
will be the silt fence plan for the development of individual lots
and blocks with continuous silt fence along all streets except
where no lot drainage goes to the street.
Drainage Easements Drainage easements will be provided wherever
drainage crosses lots.
5. C= ingent Approval Developer agrees that the above - referenced
details will be provided to the satisfaction of the Director of
Public porks prior to final plat approval.
Sanitary an S ever pater Main
Sanitary sewer ga=_sments outalde the Dcvel will bo rrgyided
An easement for utilities will be required from the "Stassen"
property.
San±tan• eewQr extenelor frn Stree The City will
construct the sanitary sewer at its expense across Tower Street
right -of -way to the edge of the street. Developer will be
responsible for sever construction beyond that point.
LARKIN. HUTI'MAN. T)Af.y a% LivDf:nEm. LTD.
City of Prior Lake
August 2e, 1991
Peae_5 —.. - --
3. Liydrent ac ujap. Hydrant spacing and valve location will be
coordinated between City and developer's engineers.
9. Watermain Yatermain lines and utilities will be installed to the
south edge of Mushtown right -of -way. Developer will be
responsible for one half of cost to extend utilities across
Mushtown right -of -way.
Streets
I. Typical etree "etijon. Staff and developer agree to a 36' street
section for Toronto Avenue and a 30' street section for all other
residential streets.
2. TDnRgz cul- de -aac .grading. Developer's engineer will show
profile of grading and drainage of temporary cul -de -sac east of
Pondview Trail
3. Sidewalks. Staff and developer agree to construction of five 5'
sidewalk on rest side of Toronto Avenue and e' bituminous trail on
east side of Toronto Avenue.
•• Mushtown R oad improvements Developer agrees to responsibility
for 50% of the costs of the Mushtown Road improvements to be
constructed at the time of the development of Phase III. The
developer's share is for a 36' urban road section with a 7 ton
design. The City may design a wider road with a 9 ton design.
5. Vertical Caryey. Developer agrees all vertical curves shall meet
the 30 mile an hour design requirement. City engineer to confirm
with developer's engineer on details.
6. Mailboxes City to confer with Postal Services to confirm
location and style of mailboxes in cul -de -sacs.
7. 170th Street onetruccion Staff and developer agree that the
cost of the improvements of 170th Street is not the responsibility
of the developer.
S. Gazzqe_cdA Movation Staff and developer agree that garage
slab elevations will be 1.5' above street elevation with positive
drainage around houses. Swales around homes will have positive
drainage along side lot lines to conform with 100 year storm
event.
LARKIN. HurrMAV. D Aix .& Li�naRrv, Lrn.
City of Prior Lake
Au4Dust 26, 1991
This letter is intcrded tc r,.enorinlEzo tn,- and- raindin7e r" it
cur meeting,. If /c- have any gcestien_ or Ti•gj—T -e nnA!ficet! ^ns,
please contact me at 096 -3203.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. R ne, for
LARKIN, HOFF! N, DALY G LINDGREN, Ltd.
kv
cc: Mike Glles, New Century
Joe Mahoney, Woodridge Partners
TJK -GO7s
Minutes of the Prior Lake City Council August 5, 1991
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson, Scott and
White, the motion passed unanimously.
MOTION MADE BY SCOTT, SECONDED BY FITZGERALD, TO APPROVE THE St" "
LAKE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ETHICS STATEMENT.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson, Scott and
White, the motion passed unanimously.
The next order of business was: Second Consideration of
Rezoning Application for New Century Construction - Ordinance
91 -09. Mayor Andren called the continued Public Hearing to
order. Planning Director Graser briefly reviewed the decision by
Council to continue the hearing to allow City Attorney Kassel
time to research whether or not a rezoning action could be
conditioned upon a future event. (Based upon Attorney Kassel's
findings, conditioned rezoning is legal). ordinance 91 -09 was
submitted, contingent upon: (1) Metropolitan Council approval
of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and (2) a Sunshine Date of
November 15, 1991 to be incorporated which will give the
Metropolitan Council slightly more than 90 days to approve the
Comprehensive Plan, at which time the law will become valid. If
Metropolitan Council does not approve the Plan Amendment, then on
November 15, 1991 the law would be declared null and void.
Council concurred that this Ordinance should be adopted.
MOTION MADE BY WHITE, SECONDED BY FITZGERALD, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE
91 -09 AMENDING PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE TITLE 5 AND THE PRIOR LAKE
ZONING ORDINANCE 83 -6 WITH CONTINGENCIES AS SPECIFIED.
New
Lent v
Conntn.
cmwar
Ondinano
91 -09
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson, Scott and
White, the motion passed unanimously.
MOTION MADE BY LARSON, SECONDED BY SCOTT, TO ADJOURN THE P '?'
PUBLIC HEARING. 44o`
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson, Scott and
White, the motion passed unanimously.
The next order of business was: Consider Approval of Lakefront LakesOn
Park Trail Plans and Specifications. Assistant City Engineer Park
Loney presented proposed plans for a trail system within T
' akefront Park for the purpose of receiving authorization from Ptann
Council to advertise for bids. Council had authorized a General
Fund Balance transfer of $75,000.00 to construct trails for
Lakefront Park on July 15, 1991. Laney reported on modifications
to the original plan and the findings of the survey team with
regard to boundaries. Extensive discussion occurred regarding
the placement of the trails, future plans for parking, access and
other suggested improvements to Lakefront Park. General consensus
of Council was for staff to re- evaluate the trail location from
Lakefront Park to Ridgemont Avenue.
MOTION MADE BY WHITE, SECONDED BY SCOTT, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION RS 91 -34
91 -34 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING A�vin
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS ON TRAIL IMPROVEMENT (PROJECT 91 -14).
& Sped
L.F. Pain
7Rau
®& pR10k HERITAGE COMMUNITY 4f5a 1"
1891 1991 2oy�
U T
t+9
N Eso� .
AGENDA NUMBER: 5
PREPARED BY: HORST GRASER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
SUBJECT: SECOND CONSIDERATION OF REZONING APPLICATION
FOR NEW CENTURY CONSTRUCTION - ORDINANCE 91 -09
DATE: AUGUST 5, 1991
INTRODUCTION: This public hearing item is a continuation
from July 15. 1991. The requested action is
from developers Mike Giles and Joe Mahoney to
rezone the recently annexed 70 acres lying
adjacent to and directly west of the "The
Pond" Athletic Complex from A -1 Agricultural
to R -1 Single Family Residential.
BACKGROUND: This hearing was continued for legal research
to determine if an ordinance could be adopted
with a condition based upon the happening of a
future event. Attorney Glenn Kassel,
researched the matter and has concluded from
his own findings and based upon an attorney
general's opinion that conditional rezonings
are legal.
Both the Council and Staff did not want to
rezone the subject site if it was not brought
into the urban service area via a
comprehensive plan amendment approval by the
Metropolitan Council. Staff will be
submitting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to
the Metropolitan Council on Wednesday July 31,
1991. it has been agreed by all parties that
the Amendment is technically a major amendment
and the Council has a 90 day review time
frame.
DISCUSSION: Attached please find a draft ordinance
rezoning the subject site from A -1 to R -1.
The rezoning is conditional upon Metropolitan
Council approval and would become ineffective
after November 15, 1991. The date is a
sunshine clause to assure that this ordinance
was meant for the Giles- Mahoney development
only. The November 15th date gives the
Metropolitan Council slightly more than 90
days to make a decision and report back to the
City on the major comprehensive plan
amendment.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the attached ordinance as
proposed.
2. Continue the hearing to a date certain.
3. Deny the rezoning.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake Minnesota 5072 1 Ph (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
RECOMMENDATION: Under the circumstances a conditional rezoning
is supported by Staff. This entire package
has been before the City for over 12 months,
the annexation ha been accepted by the
Municipal Board, tk --< Comprehensive Plan has
been approved by she Council, and all
Councilmembers agre with the R -1 designation.
Given these four points, Staff recommends
approval of Ordinance 91 -09.
ACTION REQUIRED: A motion to approve Ordinance Number 91 -09 is
in order.
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
ORDINANCE NO. 91 -09
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE TITLE S AND THE PRIOR
LAKE ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 83 -6.
The Council of the City of Prior Lake does hereby ordain&
The Prior Lake Zoning Map, referred to in Prior Lake City Code
Section 5-2 -1 and the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance Section 2.1,
is hereby amended, conditioned upon Metropolitan Council
approval of the Prior Lake Comprehensive Plan, from A -1
Agricultural to R -1 Residential for the following described
property:
That part of the west half of the Northeast Quarter of
Section 11, Township 114, Range 22, lying Northeasterly
of the center line of Mushtown Road, Scott County,
Minnesota, consisting of approximately 69.82 acres
In the event the Metropolitan Council does not approve the Prior
Lake Comprehensive Plan amendment incorporating the above
described property in its urban service area on or before
November 15, 1991, then this rezoning ordinance amendment shall
be null and void and of no force and effect.
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 1991.
ATTEST:
City Manager ayoFl r
Published in the Prior Lake American on the _ day of
, 1991.
Drafted By:
Locomen, Nelson, Cole i Stageberg, P.A.
1800 IDS Center
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
L
1
1; r
i
• fir
N,-12 SEC. fl T. 114 R 22
r.. WOOD RIDGE
—1/ 6
0 corn�o�orva PL"
AM®I OR
0 wm Ylslox
� Q ■820111MO
Q AIUANCE
a.I
CHANGE. LAND USE PROM 'OPEN SPACE" TO' LAW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL'
REZONE FROM A•1 AGRICULTURAL TO R•1 URBAN RESIDENTIAL N
4
VARIANCE NEEDED FOR CUL- DE�CAC$ TO BE LANCER THAN 5W
SUBDIVIDE SITE FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES
Minutes Of The Prior Lake City Council July 15, 1991
The next order of business was: Presentation of Proposed Fire
Hall Site Information. Assistant Fire Chief Brent Johnson FHe
introduced the Truck Committee: Ken Klingberg, Bruce Thomas, Mark N am
Fredrick, and Building Committee: Jerry Mahony, Larry Stier, Doug New
Hartman and Skip Reebie. Information from Zack Johnson, EOS Bldg.
Architecture, showing alternatives for a downtown fire station Cvffna xee
were handed out. Brent Johnson stated that estimates for a
pumper fire truck and a heavy rescue equipment truck were from
5430,000 to $440,000 for the two trucks. Johnson then discussed
the status of the project Feasibility Report on the Fire Hall.
The next step will be to obtain approval from Council for
preliminary land acquisition procedures in order to finalize
estimates for the proposeQ Fire Hall. Johnson requested a date
be set for a workshop for Council and the Fire Hall Building
Committee to discuss the plans in detail. Discussion occurred on
the presentation and Council concurred that Wednesday, August 21
from 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. at the Fire Hall would be an acceptable
date.
The next order of business was: Consider Comprehensive Plan. New
Amendment and Rezoning For New Century Construction. Tim Keane, Con.tuty
Larkin, Hoffman, Daley and Lindgren, representing New Century Co"tn ac
Construction, requested that the Council approve a Comprehensive Comp Pion
Plan Amendment to include property located within the City's dedhd,e�t
urban service area and rezone from A -G agricultural to R -1 and
single family residential. Planner Horst Graser explained the ReJoning
staff report and background on the application. Graser also
explained why this action is coming prior to the preliminary plat
and stated that the Metropolitan Council could possibly take up
to 90 days to grant approval for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
and the applicant has a limited time frame to begin development
before winter. Extensive discussion occurred on the
alternatives.
MOTION MADE BY FITZGERALD, SECONDED BY WHITE, TO APPROVE THE C(MP
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CONTINGENT UPON METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PLAN
APPROVAL. ~0.
N6W Cent
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson, Scott and C0n4t4UC -t4
White, the motion passed unanimously.
MOTION MADE BY WHITE, SECONDED BY FITZGERALD, TO REZONE THIS ReJane
PROPERTY FROM A -1 TO R -1 CONTINGENT, UPON METROPOLITAN COUNCIL New Cent.
APPROVAL OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. ConAtz.
Discussion occurred on the technicalities of rezoning property
with contingencies. Motion was withdrawn.
MOTION MADE BY FITZGERALD, SECONDED BY WHITE, TO CONTINUE THE Continue
REZONING HEARING UNTIL THE AUGUST 5, 1991 COUNCIL MEETING. PLL
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson, Scott and tan New
White the motion Cent. Con.,
passed unanimously.
5
/ PRI
// "CELEBRATE PRIOR LAKE'S CENTENNIAL - 1991"
A r.
AGENDA NUMBER: 9
PREPARED BY: HORST W. GRASER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
SUBJECT: CONSIDER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT P
REZONING FOR NEW CENTURY CONSTRUCITON
DATE: JULY 15, 1991
INTRODUCTION: Mike Giles and Joe Mahoney (New Centu
Construction), have requested a comprehensi
plan amendment and rezoning for approximate
70 acres of vacant land adjacent to a
directly west of the "The Poru" athlet
complex. The comprehensive plan amendme
specifically requests the subject site
brought into the urban service area a
designated low density residential. T
rezoning would implement the comprehensi
plan by changing the zoning from E:
Agricultural to R -1 Residential.
BACKGROUND: The subject site was annexed to Prior Le :e
earlier this Year (effective date May
1991) in anticipation of subdivision appro,:l
later this year. To expedite the matte.-,
Staff scheduled the subdivision, rezoning, zed
comprehensive plan amendment
contemporaneously. The Planning Commiss an
held the hearings on June 20, 1991, <.id
concurred with Staff recommendations to ama id
the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance is
requested. The subdivision was tabled �r
additional information and detail. Howeve.-,
Staff is recommending that the comprehensive
plan and zoning ordinance amendments continue
through the hearing process. he
comprehensive plan amendment must eventua ly
be approved by the Metropolitan Council wh - .ch
could take up to 90 days. Time is critial
since the developers would like to install e
first phase improvements before frost t
fall.
DISCUSSION: Attached to this report, please find a
memorandum dated June 20, 1991 referencing he
Comprehensive Plan Amendment and is
reasoning. This parcel has appeared bef re
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 I Ph. (612) 4474230 1 Fax (6121 44742-
the Council on several occasions for various
planning related issues. The detail found in
the Staff Report will no augmented with a
Staff presentation. Keep in mind that
approval for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
must be approved with condition of
the Metropolitan Council's approval.
ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives are as follows:
1. Approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
and rezoning as requested subject to the
Metropolitan Council's approval.
2. Continue the hearing process.
3. Deny the amendment and rezoning.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative #1.
ACTION REQUIRED: A motion to approve the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and rezoning subject to the
Metropolitan Council's review and approval is
in order.
N:12 /2 SEC. H T. 114 R 22
IMM 1001
_ ^r .
� � .; WOOD RIDGE
CHANGE LAND USE FROM - OPEN SPACE TO "LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -
REZONE FROM A -1 AGRICULTURAL TO R -1 URBAN RESIDENTIAL
VARIANCE NEEDED FOR CUL- DESACS TO BE LONGER THAN 500'
SUBDIVIDE SITE FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES
THE POND
ATWLEnC COW LEX
O ('OM�REMEl61VE .U1M
AYENpA1EMT
0 wmns�ox
Q REiARIXG
Q "AR1AWE
N
4
PRIC,
"CELEBRATE PRIOR LAKE'S CENTENNIAL • 1991"
FN ; r
"WDRIDG^
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: HORST GRASER
RE: WOOD RIDGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: REZONING;
PRELIMINARY PLAT; AND VARIANCE
DATE: JUNE 20, 1991
INTRODUCTION:
The applicants, Mike Giles and Joe Mahoney, contract purchasers
of about 70 acres of land recently annexed to the City, have
requested necessary approvals, amendments, and permits for Wood
Ridge Estates. The subject site has been the focus of rigorous
annexation hearings over the course of the last year. During
this period, both the Planning Commission and Council became
somewhat familiar with the site, its constraints and the
developers conceptual development plan. The annexation became
official May 14, 1991.
The developers are actively seeking all necessary approvals to
permit the installation of the first phase of improvements before
winter. To expedite the matter Staff has scheduled all public
hearings to be held contemporaneously since the issues are
interelated.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT:
The requested action by the developers is to amend the 1981
Comprehensive Plan by expanding the urban service area to include
the subject site. Prior Lake is close to completing its
comprehensive plan rewrite. One of the major components of the
plan is to establish the year 2010 urban service area. In
anticipation of the annexation earlier this year, Staff has
already included the subject parcel in the proposed 2010 urban
service area (see attached map; re: proposed urban service
area).
Prior Lake's current urban service area totals 4,273 acres, the
majority of which lies between the lake and County Road 42.
Development in this area has been slow to occur perhaps due to
the large size of the available parcels and the unwillingness of
property owners to sell. The largest addition to Prior Lake's
2010 urban service area is 300 acres adjacent to and directly
north of County Road 42 (Vierling property). However, this site
is at least 8 years away from development and is scheduled for
industrial use. The other urban service area expansion north of
4629 Dakota St S.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612)447-4230/Fax(612)4474245
An Equal Opportunity AJJimwtiue Action Employer
the lake includes about 140 acres comprised of smaller parcels
lying directly northwest of the intersection of 154th Street and
County Road 21.
The subject site is definitely a devised inclusion in the 2010
urban service area because of its current development potential.
Prior Lake's lot supply has dwindled to less than 150 lots.
This proposal would add about 40 single family lots per Year over
a 4 year period to Prior Lake's inventory. The City Engineer has
reported that utilities are available and of capacity to expand
the urban service area as proposed.
Staff recommends the Planning
recommend to the City Council to
proposed by the developers and
low density residential.
Commission adopt a motion to
expand the urban service area as
to designate the land use map as
REZONING:
Land areas annexed or merged to the City shall be classified as
A -1 Agricultural until such a time the City Council may rezone
the added land area to the appropriate classification (Zoning
Code Section 1.2). When the subject site was annexed in May of
this year it was automatically designated A -1 Agricultural. The
applicants have petitioned to rezone the subject site to R -1
single family residential.
The markets in Prior Lake clearly call for single family
residential. The developer is not interested in pursuing other
opportunities or densities. Prior Lake's building activities and
starts have virtually all been single family.
From a land use relationship the property could foster a number
of different densities. Higher densities could be developed
along the north and east border of the site with lower densities
to the west. However, the market for higher density is non
existent which eliminates the possibility of a PUD.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission rezone the subject
property to R -1 single family.
PRELIMINARY PLAT A VARIANCE:
Wood Ridge Estates is a 70 acre planned single family development
consisting of 155 lots, streets, and open space. It will be a
part of a neighborhood that is bordered by The Pond Athletic
Complex on the east, Crystal Lake on the west, and B -3 commercial
district on the north. The southern boundary will be defined by
an east west collector street at a future date.
The subdivision ordinance requires the developer to incorporate
the site's positive features and eliminate or minimize the
influence of the sites constraints. The insight into design is
critical in achieving a desirable end product. However, it
appears that the engineer responsible for technical support and
the planner responsible for design were not well coordinated.
Although the site design is basically sound the grading appears
to undue what design was trying to create.
The site has a number of important natural features and
opportunities. First and foremost it is located within walking
distance of shopping, essential services, and a community park.
The design must reflect pedestrian traffic connecting these
features. On the east side of the site is a 200 foot corridor of
mature trees consisting of maple, oak, and elm. This significant
and neighborhood identifying feature must be used to separate the
active athletic complex from the R -1 neighborhood. The grading
plan indicates the vast majority of this "Wood Ridge" will be
eliminated. The developer must be more sensitive to this
relationship. The pond in the northwest corner of the site is
significant and therefore site design must reflect shared values.
The developer has designated open space between the roadway and
pond. The park department has requested park land sufficient for
a walkway adjacent to the pond with a destination of the
athletic fields.
Mushtown Road is a township road with a gravel surface that has a
possibility of high speed and high volumes of traffic. The lot
depth along Mushtown Road should be at least 150 feet in depth.
Screening and a berm is indicated for lots along 170th Street,
but nothing is shown for land use separation between the B -3 and
R -1 Zone in Block 1.
Although there are not many steep slopes in this site they should
be located accurately and respected. It would appear that Lot 30
Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 12, is unbuildable because of steep
slopes. It appears this area needs to be reworked to reflect
steep slopes. Lot 1, Block 14, is a large lot but relatively
isolated by the trail and streec system. It would become more
desirable if added to Block 4 as Lot 16.
Pondview Trail calls for a cul -de -sac outside the development.
An easement must be provided to the City. Lots 1 and 2, Block 3
appear too shallow to accommodate a home and trail. At minimal
they should be combined. The accuracy of this area is questioned
therefore the street and corner of lots should be staked to gain
a visual relationship. The tree cover to the west of Block 1
should also be shown. It is desirable to have the buffer lots in
Block 1, 150 feet in depth.
Lot 2, Block 9, is a butt lot and must be 96 feet in width. Lot
1, Block 6, should be eliminated since it produces an
undesirable park design. Oakwood Circle is a cul -de -sac in
excess of 500 feet and will require a variance. Given the
circumstances this is an accepable situation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Attached to this memorandum are the reports from Parks,
Engineering, and Building Departments which contain requests for
change and additional detail. However, the positive aspect at
this stage is that the hearing process has begun and we are
closer to completion. Although detail is missing in some areas,
we can take this opportunity to discuss and hopefully settle the
final design of the site. I have asked all department heads to
be present and prepared to comment. Even though this plan is not
ready for preliminary plat approval, significant gains can be
made.
�IV PRI(�\
v X
r
�
"VA21PC"
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY
MS91
PLANNING REPORT
SUBJECT: LAKESHORE VARIANCE
APPLICANT: DOUGLAS THIELBAR
SITE ADDRESS: 15329 BREEZY POINT ROAD
PRESENTER: DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER
PUBLIC HEARING: YES X NO
DATE: DECEMBER 19, 1991
SITE ANALYSIS
HISTORY /BACKGROUND
The Planning Department has received a variance application from
Douglas Thielbar who is requesting approval of a 44' foot
Lakeshore variance to construct a single family home. The
subject site is legally described as the north 10 feet of Lot 11,
Lot 12, 13 and the east part of Lot 17, Breezy Point. See
attached survey and architectural drawing for reference to this
application.
PREVIOUS PROPOSALS:
There are no previous permit or variance records on file with the
Planning Department for this property.
PHYSIOGRAPHY:
T e site is relatively flat and low lying. There is an existing
cabin and garage on the site that are proposed to be removed.
The lot will require some fill in order to provide a building pad
that is compliant with the flood plain ordinance. The lowest
living elevation of the home must be elevated to at least the
elevation of 909. It is unlikely that a house plan with a full
basement could be constructed on site due to the floodplain
considerations. The Property contains four to five substantial
trees, three of which will be lost to construction. The trees
located within closest proximity to the cabin appear to be oak,
basswood and cottonwood trees. The tops of the two trees located
adjacent to Lot 11 are damaged, apparently by wind or other
environmental conditions. The Planning Commission may wish to
discuss planting considerations for this site above the erosion
control requirements that will be applied at the time of building
permit application.
ADJACENT USES:
The adjacent properties have been developed with single family
homes. This neighborhood was platted in 1923 with lots that are
severely substandard by current zoning regulations. Some of the
lots are less than 65' feet deep. As such, any new construction
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
or additions to existing structures have required extensive
setback and coverage variances. Staff researched and found that
Lakeshore variances have been granted to allow structures within
9' feet of the 904 contour, within this development. The subject
site is the largest platted lot within the subdivision. However,
due to its location on a peninsula, the 904 encroaches upon three
sides of the site. There is no building envelope on the site
that meets required setbacks from the 904.
RECOMMENDATION
The recommendation from staff is to approve the 44' lakeshore
variance as requested subject to the following conditions:
1) The applicant grant the City an easement for utility purposes
over Lot 17, as required by the City Engineer.
2) The variance approval be subject to an approved
administrative land division for Lot 17, Breezy Point.
3) The existing cabin and garage be removed.
4) A planting plan be submitted, acceptable to staff with tree
replacement as required by the Planning Commission.
The rational for granting the variance is that the hardship is
not the result of the property owner but is caused by the
Ordinance. The site was subdivided by a previous government and
as such is non - conforming to current Prior Lake zoning standards.
The lot is unique in that it is very shallow (less than 100' feet
deep) and it is located on a peninsula. There is no building
envelope available on the lot once setback standards are applied.
Numerous lakeshore variances have been granted to lots within
this subdivision for construction and addition to structures.
The variance requested is consistent with previous applications
for similar lots within this neighborhood. As such, the variance
observes the spirit of the ordinance and would not be detrimental
to the health and welfare of the community.
•n l l
PID1 -i� Liu;
GRI!OrNoo go) r ;Lo • ei
Applicant: Do 145 Thie.(bccr Hone Phone: ?f 94- /b40
Address: 13'133 W Prtseroz Wvd Agrnsv UL rnn Work Phone: 890 - 5601 -
Property Owner: Hyrjid (145 +,, �.f on Hane Phone g43-a114
Address: Work Phone:
Type of Ownership: Fee Contract Purchase Agreement
Consultant /Contractor: [),Anne 5.hyat Phone: 153 - 3653
Existing UsQ
of Property:.
of Proper
Legal Des
of Varian
Variance
Zoning:
f� t:i)
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 x No
What was requested-
When: Disposition:
Describe the type of improvements proposed:_
(1)Completed application form. (Wiling fee. (C)Property Survey. (D)Certified from
abstract firm, names and addresses of property owners within 100 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the subject property. (E)Complete legal description 6
Property Identification Number (PID). (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if
applicable. (G)A parcel map at 1 "- 20' -50' showing: The site development plan,
buildings: parking, loading, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility
service.
ONLY COMPLETE APPLICATIONS SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING ODWISSION.
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 provide information and follow the
procedures as outlined in the Ordinan
cants OS t
Submitted this !L of Q 19-
X -
TO BE FILLED 001' BY THE PLANNING
PLANNING COMISSION _ APPROVED _ DENIED
CITY COUNCIL APPEAL _ APPROVED _ DENIED
DATE OF HEARIM
DATE OF HEARING
ODNDITIONS:
Signature of the Planning Director
Date
Land Surveyors
Pl mnare .
Valley Surveying Co., P. As
V (612) 447 -2570 P. 0. Box 476, Suite 120C
16670 Franklin Trail S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
October 25, 1991
Description prepared fort
Nark Stromwall
16670 Franklin Trail SE
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Re: Description to split lot 17, Breezy Point, (Gustafson Property):
DESCRIPTION:
The northerly 10.00 feet Of Lot 11, and all of Lots 12 and 13, BREEZY POINT, Scott
County, Minnesota. Together with that part of Lot 17, of said plat lying easterly of
the southerly extension of the westerly line of said Lot 13.
�I
De Sptio r ed by:
r
onald A. Swenson Land Surveyor
Minnesota License No. 10183
�1D #
+13
i I
_ a,�oaGUD� - o
a5 02G ro 9-
file no. 5068 -1
PRIOR LAKE
1
1
• +aar r •rtmu=. of an• nurnr .... at wa ma U.
PRIOR LAKE
PRIOR LAKE
S
O \ Z A
i
\ O \
\ 9 \
`a
NE �I98LT AciSOC.
s
FIRST FLLY'R IY�7J
i
5Uotc Ftlr -R F'[AN
F�ioR
LANE
RIOR
LARE
FP-oNT EI.eVATIO
�4 PRI
/
4
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
r /? 1891 1991
J T.
f,
"VA21PN"
NOTICE OF HEARING
FOR
VP.RIANCE
9;r�J.5�3 4
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, DECEMBER 19 1991 at 7:45 P.M.
PURPOSE OF HEARING: To consider a variance application
for Douglas Thielbar.
SUBJECT SITE LOCATION: 15329 Breezy Point Road
Part of Lot 11, Lots 12 and 13, and
Part of Lot 17, Breezy Point.
REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant requests the Planning
Commission to grant a 44' foot
lakeshore variance in order to build
a new single family home as
indicated on the attached survey.
The required lakeshore setback is 75'
feet measured from the 904 contour.
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: December 10, 1991
4629 Dakota St. S.E, Prior Lake Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245