Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 March Planning Commission Meeting MinutesCITY OF PRIOR LAKE PLANNING ODMMISSION AGENDA movies 19, 1987 7:30 P.M. CALL TO DRUM 7:30 P.M. REVI6R MINIM OF PREVIOUS MEETING 7:35 P.M. REARING 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 9:30 P.R. HEARING 9:45 P.& HEARING COMr. OF P.D.D. TOM S'PBPHEIS /. t. — . * � U.J 11,E %-,'4 Y: (812) 447.4290 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. SOX 359 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 56372 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE PLANNING CDMMISSION MII urEs MARCH 19, 1987 The March 19, 1987 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:32 P.M. by Vice Chairman Roseth. Present were Commissioners Arnold, wells, Kedrovaki, City Planner Graser, and Assistant City Planner Garross. Commissioner Loftus arrived at 7:50 P.M. ITEM I - REVIEW MnffJTFS OF PREVIOUS MEETING MM70N BY AI=Z TO APPROVE THE K W1TES OF THE MARCH 5, 1987 PLANNIM COlAIISSICN MELTn G AS PRESWTED, HEMMED BY WELLS. Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Kedrowski, Roseth, Wells; the motion carried. ITEM II - CONCEPTUAL PLAT HEARIEG FOR DOUG FARRELL - NCR7H SHORE OARS Gene Sinpkins and Doug Farrell, property owners, commented that they are seeking concept approval for a small subdivision consisting of 13 lots which is located adjacent to Carriage Hill Road. The introduction of sewer and water to the area has prompted the owners to submit development plans. City Planner Grazer discussed the Conceptual Plat for North Shore Oaks This plat would came under the old Subdivision Ordinance and Conceptual Plat approval was given by Eagle Creek Township prior to its annexation to Prior Lake. Mr. Graser further commented on sewer utilities planned for the area, tree plantings, width of Carriage Hill Road, and the proposed park land. The area designated for park is low land and may not satisfy City park dedication requirements. The developer should give thought to retaining the parcel as a natural wildlife area. Staff recomwaids conceptual plat approval. The Planning Commissioners commented on the topography being even with little grading and filling to be done, the size of the lots, proposed price range and possibility of creating lots to accommodate garages. The Commissioners were concerned that many of the proposed lots are smaller in dimension than lots in adjacent subdivisions. Adjacent homeowners may oppose the platting of lots smaller than existing lots. It was the consensus of the Commission that the developer should proceed with their plans. At this time a 5 minute recess was called. The meeting was called back to order at 8:13 P.M. by Qainman Loftus. (912) 447.4230 4029 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 359 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372 MINUTES OF THE PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 19, 1987 Previous to the meeting at 5:30 P.M. a tour of the property for this hearing was taken by Staff, Planning Commission, developer, and area residents. Greg Halling, Engineer for Rehder Wenzel, and representative for the developer was present to answer questions. City Planner Graser reviewed past action of Priorwood P.U.D. with regard to the history of the P.U.D. and original proposal to develop 106 multi family units in a 17.4 acre parcel. The concerns of 5 years ago are similar to todays concerns. They consist of natural limitations of the site, garage space, another need for a plan with detail and good architectural design. Five years ago the Prior Lake market favored apartments and condominiums while today's market is for single family homes. Mr. Graser further commented on drainage and creek flowage, the integration of the P.U.D. development with adjacent developed neighborhoods, tot lot area, road design and collector system for safety, grading and filling destruction, flood plain and orientation of units on the property. At this time audience input was called for. The area residents were opposed to the increased density proposed, destruction of natural features, devaluation of their property, impact of development on the environmentally sensitive area, transition area between single family homes and condos or apartments with a buffer, increased heavy traffic in area if Cates and Five Hawks are connected, erosion and water flow, and tot lot location a concern for safety. The Planning Commissioners had concerns over the in —eased density, haw changes from the first P.U.D. request to this amendment affect the density bonuses given, density bonuses should be re- evaluated, tot lot location, destruction of slopes and natural features, developers lack of concern for the environment, amount of buildable area, trails/walkways, aesthetic design, roadway circulation for safety, drainage and water flow, owner occupied or rental, engineering and parks concerns. The Cammissionners were concerned that the density the developer is attempting to achieve is in direct conflict with the goals of P.U.D. development as specified in Section 6.11 of the Zoning Ordinance. MOTION BY WELLS TO DENY THE PRIORWOOD P.U.D. APPLICATION AS PRESENTED BASED ON: 1. THE P.U.D. DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. 2. UNITS TO NORTH IN THE P.U.D. ARE TOO CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE, A 15' BUFFER IS NEEDED TO REMIM NATURAL FEATURES AND TO PROVIDE SEPARATION BE7WEEN THE P.U.D. AMID EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THE PROPOSAL SHOULD INCLUDE PLANS FOR A SIDEWALK Xa G FIVE HAWKS AVENUE AMID A PRIVACY FENCE BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND P.U.D. 3. LOCATION AND SIZE OF TOT LOT SHOULD BE ADDED AS PER STAFF'S RHCOMASMDATTON. 4. SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE REOONMENDID ALONG MONTE EDGE OF P.U.D. FOR TRANSITION AREA AND OWNER OCCUPIED UNITS SHOULD BE LmOORPORATED AS WELL L3 RENTAL UNITS. 5. INSUFFICIENT PARKING SPACES FOR P.U.D. Rj kl 0;Wn,a, ;,a,;,w., }; fl MURYT S OF THE PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 19, 1987 Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Xedrewski, Loftus, Roseth, Wells; the motion carried. MOTION BY ARNOID TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONCEPT SITE PLAN - PRIORAIDD P.U.D. AMENDMENT BY TOM STEFFENS, SECONDED BY ROSETH. Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Xedrowski, Loftus, Roseth, Wells; the motion carried. `The tape of this hearing will be kept on file in the office of the City Planner as the official record of this Public Hearing. At this time a 5 minute recess was called. The meeting resumed at 10:05 P.M. ITEM IV - CMaU UEa VARIAN FMUEST BY GRFI^: EIRE Greg Eide commented that the request is for a 24'X28' garage to the south side of his house. Assistant City Planner Garross commented per memo dated 3/5/87 with regard to safety onto County Road 81. Also stating that a call from Brad Larson, Scott County Highway Fthgineer was received. The County would be opposed to this variance request due to the creation of another access point onto County Road 81. Staff was concerned that a safe intersection could not be achieved due to existing topography on the site. The Planning Commissioners commented an the topography of the lot with concern over the steep slope and limited landing space at County Road 81. The Commissioners were concerned that the intersection of the driveway and County Road 81 would cause an unsafe situation for the homeowner and traffic on the County Road. MUTION BY AMID TO DENY THIS REQUEST FOR A 34 FOUT FRONT YARD VARIANCE FROM THE SOUTHEAST PROPS 7 :LINE FOR 3013 FAIL M ROAD 'SnC8 TO SLOPE PRESENTS AN UNSAFE CONDITICN FOR ACCESS TO G"M Row 81, HEMMED BY HOSETH. Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Xedrowski, Loftus, RDseth, Hells; the motion carried. ITEM V - OO;PTINI7� VARIANTS RFI)[188T BY Dffim ALBERTS Doi Alberts commented on the request for an 8' frontyard and 4 south aide yard variance to build a garage. Mr. Alberts presented two letters from abutting property owners, Ardis Bergh north side property owner and Mr. 6 Mrs. Michael Wagner south aide property owners, not opposed to the variance request. Also Mr. Alberts presented pictures showing lot lines and house which he bought as such. Assistant City Planner Garross commented per memo dated 3/19/87 with regard that the lot exceeds minimum lot size requirements, the applicant purchased the home with full knowledge of the garage and driveway situation, and lack of hardship as specified in Section 7.6 of the City Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commissioners discussed the variance and understood the situation. However there was concern over setting an irreversible precedent. 3 MRUjT 6 OF THE PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MAR(H 19, 1987 NOTION BY ROSEIH 1D DENY THE APPLICATION FOR 4'11' SIDE YARD AND 8' FRONT YARD vARIANCE FOR 14704 OWE AVENUE S.E. SINCE IT DOES NOT CONPORM ID THE PRIOR LAKE ZONING OEUnW4CE SEOTION 7.6 AND GRANTING W)UID SET AN IRMWERS PRECEDENT, SECONDED BY ARNOLD. Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Kedrowski, Roseth, Wells; nay by Loftus (He felt there was a hardship not caused by the applicant.); the motion carried. NOTICE; BY ROSETN TO AAOURN ME MARCH 19, 1987 PRIOR LAKE PLMOM;G COMUSSION MEPIN;G, SEOOIDED BY Ar*XW. upon a vote to ken, ayes by Arnold, Kedrowski, Loftus, RDseth, Wells; the motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M. 4 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE > ammassION AGENDA MARM 5, 1987 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER 7:30 P.M. NEVIEMt MINUTES OF PREVIOUS NMTD G 7:35 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING ZONING CODE AMEN 7:35 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 8:15 P.N. PUBLIC HEARING OMITIOML USE PERMIT P.O.D. AMENDMENT 9:00 P.M. SAS DEVELOPMENT T INC. SAS DEVE[OPME7P INC. GREG N. BIDS (812) 117.1238 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 968 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 56372 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MUCH 5, 1987 The March 5, 1987 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7 P.M. by Chairman Loftus. Present were Commissioners Arnold, Roseth, Wells, City Planner Graser and Assistant City Planner Garross. Absent was Commissioner Kedrowski. ITEM I - REVIEW MIIIIVES GP PREVIOUS MEIMW MOTION BY ARNOLD TO APPROVE TRB MINUTES Or THE FEBRUA 19, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AS PRESENTED, SECONDED BY ROSEl9. Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Wells; the motion carried. ITEM II 6 III - PUBLIC MEM FOR SAS DEV OPIUEniT ZONING CODE AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE WAS CALLED TO ORDER Scott Lindholm, owner, commented an the request to amend the zoning code to permit car washes as a conditional use In the B-1 Limited Business District for Lot 1, Block 1 Jm es 1st Addition. The applicant commented on the demographic information being positive, site plan of project ,'description of project with regard to building construction and color, landscaping with regard to lighting and traffic flow, operating equipment and guidelines, community impact and personal data regarding owner/manager operated. City Planner Graser commented per memo dated 3/2/87 with regard to zoning code amendment in a B-1 district to allow a car wash, comunity' impact, berming and landscaping, lighting, architectural style, equipment, signage, parking, seeded va sodding, hours of operation, and area neighborhood protection. At this time audience input was called for. There were no comments from the audience. The Planning Commissioners discussed the proposed amendment, the purpose of the B-1 District and the compatibility of the use with existing business and residential development. The Commissioners were concerned with architectural style, neighbors opinion, landscape plan, parking and radii of driveways, elevations, berming to protect the residential district from light, sound, visual, noise and pollution, outside storage, reclamation system and impact on the the sewer system and proposed signage. The general consensus of the Commission was that if designed properly, a car wash facility could be introduced without detrimental impacts to the area. (612) 447.4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 359 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 65372 MINUTES OF THE PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 5, 1987 MOTION BY ROSETH TO APPROVE ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW CAR WASHES AS A CONDTI7:ONAL USE IN THE B-1 LIMITED BUSINESS DISTRICT SINCE THIS IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE COMMUNITY, SECONDED BY WELLS. Upon a vote taken, ayes by Loftus, Roseth, Wells; nay by Arnold; the motion carried. AT THIS TIME THE CONSENSUS WAS TO CONTINUE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR A CAR WASH IN A B-1 LIMITED BUSINESS DISTRICT TO APRIL 2, 1987 AT 7:35 P.M.. MOTION BY ROSEIR TO CASE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONING EDDE AMENDMENT, SECONDED BY WELLS. Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Wells; the motion carried. *line tape of this hearing will be kept an file in the office of the City Planner as the official record of this Public Bearing. At this time a 7 minute recess was called. The meeting resumed at 9:02 P.M. ITEM IV - PDBLiC REARTMI MIR Cr*Z W cunt WAN - nortaavn n It n wueww.uawwn e.. Greg Balling, Engineer for Rehder Wenzel, and representative for the developer, commented on the request to increase the density of the P.U.D. to 118 units with the annexation of Holly Court. The proposed development framework consists of 2 single family homes which would be located off Rommoke Street, one 12 unit building and six 6 unit buildings on 13 acres in Holly Court for a t density of 5 0 units. Mr. Balling presented pictures of the building disturbed land and trees already dead from grading. Also the pictures shared the type and style of units in Burnsville which will be incorporated here. Mr. Balling also commented on sidewalk along Five Hawks, additional parking stalls, trash handled by resident, location of development with respect to the 10 year flood plain, and the biggest concern of the tot lot on 1 1/2 acre site. City Planner Graser commented per memo dated 3/3/87 with regard to memo's presented by City Engineer, tarry Anderson and Parks Director, Bill Mangan. Also concern over the guidelines of a P.U.D. being uphel such as steep slopes, design of units, density, 100 year flood plain, every portion of the development made to be the best place to live, elevations, natural features, mature trees, meeting setbacks, non-buildable law area, and tot lot consideration. At this time audience input was called for. The area residents were opposed to the increased density proposed, destroying of natural features, devaluation of their property, and impact of development an the environmentally sensitive area. Residents were also opposed to the proposed location of th tot lot because they felt children would trespass into their property- 2 MINUTES OF THE PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION KUKH 5, 1987 The Planning Cammissioners had concerns over the increased density, how changes from the first P.U.D. request to this amendment affect the density bonuses given, if density bonuses can be re- evaluated, tot lot location, destruction of slopes, developers lack of concern for the environment, amount of buildable area, trail/•aalkways, aesthetic design, damage to natural features, engineering and parks memo's. The commissioners were concerned that the density the developer is attempting to achieve is in direct conflict with the goals of P.U.D. development as specified in Section 6.11 of the Zoning Ordinance. AT THIS TIM THE OONSBNSOS WAS TO CONrD= THE CONCEPT SITE PLAN - PRIOR M P.U.D. AMBmmm RBauWr ZO MARCH 19, 1987 AT 8:00 P.M. WITH A TOUR OF THE AREA AT 5:30 P.M. *The tape of this hearing will be kept on file in the office of the City Planner as the official record of this Public Bearing. rM V - mtZAHM RH708f1f' BY GM N. EIDE There was no representative for the applicant present. AT TBLS TIM THE COI SMM WAS ZO OONfnM SM VAR AWi MUBST FOR GREG N. EIRE TO MACE 19, 1987 AT 9:30 P.M. The Comissioners discussed the retreat tentatively set for April 11, 1987. The retreat date was changed to April 25, 1987. IDTM Br AFIM TO AD30URN THE MACH 5, 1987 PRIOR LABB PLAN D.NG CONKGRON MEETING, SEMH= BY WBLLB. Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Hoseth, Weller the motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 10 P.M. P 4 ;�as, , u r_,