HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 November Planning Commission MinutesCITY OF PRIOR LAKE
PLAWM G OOHNISSION
AGENDA
NOVEMBBR 20, 1986
7:30 P.N.
CAM TO OFOBR
7:30 P.N.
FMMW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS NEETING
7:35 P.N.
PUBLIC HBARING OW.
9:00 P.M.
PUBLIC HRARING ODNP.
9:15 P.M.
PUBLIC 110RUING DONP.
SUBDIVISION CHOWNCB
2.5 WHI NG ORDnQWE
POLICIES 1-6 CON.
PLAN
(852) 447.4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 359 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 20, 1986
The November 20, 1986 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting was called to order
at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Loftus. Present were Commissioners Arnold, Roseth,
Larson, City Planner Graser and Assistant City Planner Garross. Absent was
Camaissioner Wells.
IT4sT+M 1 - REVIEW MlINITTEH OF_PREVIOOS MEETING
MOTION BY ARMDID TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 6, 1986 PLANNING
commisSION MELTING AS PRESENTED, SBOOMDED BY ROSETH.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Larson; Wells absent; the
motion passed unanimously.
ITEM 1I CONTINUMMO t TO CONSIDER AMII2DMIeNJ.'S T1D TBB S[BDIVLSION
Q10=&VzL
City Planner Graser reviewed several Sections Of the Subdivision Ordinance for
the Commissioners including: title; procedure for submission of plats; required
data for preliminary plat and data required for final plat.
At this time audience input was called for. Because no one from the public was
in attendance, discussion followed by the Planning Camission.
The Commissioners discussed each section and suggested wording changes to be
incorporated into the draft.
MOTION BY AR10D TO CONTI = THE PUBLIC BEARING ON THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO
DECEMBER 18, 1986, SEODNDED BY LARSON.
Upor_ a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Larson, Roseth; Wells absent; the
motion passed unanimously.
*The tape of the hearing will be kept on file in the office of the City Planner
as the official record of this Public Hearing.
(892) 447.4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 369 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
ITEM III - PUBLIC IMMUM MET- 1ATION TO aMIDER AMMING SECTION 2.5 OF ME
ZONING ORDINANCE•
City Planner Graser reviewed Section 2.5 of the Zoning Ordinance which relates
to storm water management plan consistency. Mr. Graser commented that storm
water management requirements belong in the subdivision ordinance, not in the
Zoning Ordinance.
At this time audience input was called for. Because no one frmn the public was
in attendance, discussion by the Planning Commission followed.
The Commissioners agreed that Section 2.5 should be stricken fran the Zoning
Ordinance and the following wording be incorporated into the Subdivision
Ordinance.
Storm Water Manaaemmt - Storm water must be stored and managed within the
limits of the development whenever possible. Pbnding areas and wetlands must be
considered and evaluated for inclusion in the storm water management plan. The
Prior Lake Storm Water Management Guide Plan shall serve as a guide in the
preparation of all storm water management plans.
MOTION BY IARSON TO PIMM D TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT SECTION 2.5 STORM WATER
MANN PLAN CONSISTENCY, BE STRICKEN FROM 70 ZONING ORDINANCE AND 198
REVISED PARAGRAPH RSCOMUNDBD BY STAFF BE INCORPORATED INTO THE SUBDIVISION
ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY ROSE19.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Larson, Roseth; Wells absent; the
motion passed unanimously.
MOTION BY ROSET9 TO CLOSE 196 PUBLIC BEARING TO AMEND SECTION 2.5 OF THE ZON M
ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY ARNOLD.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Larson, Loftus, Roseth; Wells absent; the
motion passed unanimously.
*The tape of the hearing will be kept on file in the office of the City Planner
as the official record of this Public Hearing.
ITEM IV - PUBLIC HEARING CONTINLILTICK TO rOM; ltlll2 - NAmmar.
RRATU POLL `213 1-6 OF TH6 taiRdu IVE PLAN2
City Planner Graser reviewed the policy changes and new policies as per memo
dated November 17, 1986.
At this time audience input was called for. Because no one from the public was
in attendance, discussion followed by the Planning Ommission.
The Commissioners discussed the policies and had no major concerns with regard
to the policies.
MOTION BY IAR90N TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT NATURAL FAATUMES
POLICIES 1 -7, AS RECOMMENDID BY STAFF, AND INCORPORATE THEM INTO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SECONDED BY ARNOLD.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Larson, Loftus, Roseth; Wells absent; the
motion passed unanimously.
mmoN BY RDSEPH TD CLUSE THE PUBLIC HEARING DF THE MURAL FEATURES PDLICIES
CBANGES 1-6 IN THE COMPRERENSIVE PLAN, SHOODDED BY LARSM.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Larson, Loftus, Roseth; Wells amt; the
motion passed unanimously.
*The tape of the hearing will be kept on file in the office of the City Planner
as the official record of this Public Hearing.
At this time City Planner Graser requested an unscheduled item to be heard.
Tmvea If _ TLTAMn VTFW ATM AIY)TTTnv RTNAr. PrATMAYMSROLL MS CALLED TO O DEFU
City
plat
6B
Upon a
motion p
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
I�OFNI�W to', bill
all
:
7:30 P.K.
CALL TO ORDER
7:30 P.M.
REVIEW KUlWT8S OF PREVIOUS NEMM
7:35 P.R.
ROBPAIN CANPAQRLI ZOROG OODE ANB DIMT
8:00 P.K.
KARV BGOIl1 PRLIREWW PLAT
PUBLIC HEMU)G
9:00 P.K.
LAIW KILLER OONCEPT PLAK
(612) 447. 4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 369 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
PLANNING CDMMISSION
MINUTES
NME BER 6, 1986
The November 6, 1986 Prior rake Planning Commission meeting was called to order
at 7:30 P.IWL by Chairman Loftus. Present were Cammissioners Arnold, Roseth,
Wells, Assistant City Planner Garross and Consultant Planner Tooker. Absent was
Canmissicner Larson.
t t f t , • •.t 11 i " l' 1: t w.. s' 1
tFlI t IA" If 1 •':tii >I Dtf IS OR: •,t.' .
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Wells; Larson absent; the
motion passed unanimously.
The applicant, Roseann Ca pagnoli, discussed the request to allow "LIMr=
FMTZ T" as a conditional use in the A-1 agricultural district. She explained
that a party would like to purchase her home in order to establish a retreat
facility. Jody Rafferty, potential buyer, explained that she was interested in
the property because of its location and because the natural, country setting
would be conducive for a retreat. It is her intent to conduct seminars for
small groups of people for relaxation purposes.
Assistant City Planner Garross commented per memo dated October 29, 1986.
At this time audience input was called for. One member of the audience
questioned the notification procedure involved with regard to specific retreat
proposals.
Discussion followed from the Planning Commissioners with regard to traffic,
parking, size of groups, types of programs and whether the amendment should be
considered for both the A-1 and C -1 Districts due to the general nature of both.
It was the consensus of the Commission that only the Awl District be amended.
(912) 447. 4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 369 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 65372
The Comnissioners discussed the intent of the ryricultural district and were
concerned that future retreat proposals should only be allowed if they are
consistent with the staff definition of a "Limited Retreat ". Specifically, a
retreat is viewed as a place for seminars, education or learning purposes, not
for the introduction of business or retail services. The Commission felt it
important that the size of a retreat facility be limited to 15 persons and that
it should blend with existing development and the environment. A retreat
facility is a good concept however each proposal needs to be carefully
considered under the conditional use process.
NOTION BY WELLS To RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND SECTIONS 3.2 AND 8.1
OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO INCORPORATE "LIMITED RETREAT" AS DEFINED BY STAFF, AS
A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE A -1 AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. SECONDED BY AlMD.
LIMITED RETREAT: A PRIVATE, MULTIPURPOSE ENVIRONMENT FOR USE BY INDIVIDUALS AND
PRIVATE GROUPS FOR THE PURPOSE OF Off, WOWSHOFS, SEMINARS, MEDITATION
OR TRAINING SESSIONS. FOR THE PURPOSE OF THESE PA ATIONS, A LIMITED RETREAT
SHALL NOT OONSIST OF MORE THAN 15 PERSONS, INCLUDE RESTAURANTS FOR THE GENERAL
PUBLIC, NOR. BE ELIGIBLE FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Wells; Larson absent; the
motion passed unanimously.
MOTION BY ArMD To CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AM[iDMU TO SECTIONS 3.2 AND
8.1 OF ZONING ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY RCBELH.
upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Wells; Larson absent; the
motion passed unanimous
* The tape of the hearing will be kept on file in the office of the City Planner
as the official record of this Public Hearing.
ITEM III — PLmataC LRARTNf` M CONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE 2ND ALDITICmw
TO OAR RIDGE COURT
Mary Eggum, developer, commented that the proposal was to subdivide Outlot A,
Oak Ridge 1st Addition, into 3 single family lots. The developer further
explained the drainage and grading plan, the intent to preserve the natural
vegetation as mud: as possible, location of building pads and the City storm
water management easement on lot 3. Mr. Eggum also requested that the low slab
elevation of lot 3 be one foot lower than recommended by the City Engineer for
purposes of better home orientation on the lot.
Assistant City Planner Garross commented per memo dated October 29, 1986.
At this time audience input was called for. Members of the audience were
generally opposed to the plat for the following reasons: Adjacent neighbors
were concerned that grading and filling not cause drainage problems or kill
trees on their property. Residents opposed the introduction of two 80 foot
lots in a neighborhood where lot width ranges from 120 - 140 feet. Members of
the audience stated that they were not opposed to the development of the outlot
however new development should be consistent with existing lot sizes and homes.
other residents explained that they had purchased their homes with the
understanding that the outlot would remain natural and were deeply opposed to
the loss of trees and developing the parcel with smaller lots. Concern was also
expressed that smaller lot size and/or home size may result in a reduction of
property values for existing homeowners.
Discussion by the Commission followed. The Commissioners discussed aspects of
the plat such as minimum lot size and the drainage situation; the PVC overflow
pipe and who would be responsible for maintenance of the pipe to insure it is
kept in working order; and possible ways to redefine lots 1 and 2 to incorporate
additional front footage. It was the consensus of the Commission that the
developer discuss the low slab elevation of lot 3 with the City Engineer in
order to determine whether a lower slab elevation would be appropriate. The
Commission also discussed the equity question and encouraged the neighborhood
and developer to work together to solve the problem of inconsistent street
frontages. The Commissioners commented that this is an unfortunate situation.
The developer is within his rights to develop the property however, more
consideration should be given to the feelings of the neighboring residents.
MOTION BY ROSES 70 APPROVE THE PRELININARLF PLAT POR 2ND AMMON 70 OAR RIDGE
WORT SUBJECT 70:
1. DEVELOPER BE RESPONSIBLE FOR UTILITY STUBS TO LOT 1.
2. LOW SLAB FOR HOMES ON LOTS 1 -3 BE AT OR HIGHER THAN 958.4 ELEVATION.
SECONDED BY WELLS.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Wells; absent Larson; the
motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Roseth requested that all attendees at
the meeting be notified of the next hearing.
MOTION BY AMU 70 CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL. FOR
2ND AMMON TO OAK RIDGE. CURT, SECONDED BY ROSETS.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Wells; absent Larson; the
motion passed unanimously.
* The tape of the 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 five minute recess was called.
Chairman Loftus called the meeting back to order at 9:15 P.M.
ITEM IV - COW PLAN POR LARRY MLISER
The next item on the agenda was discussion of a concept plan for Lot 9, Seven
Acres and part of Government Lot 6, Section 30. Consultant Planner Rooker
commented on the request to subdivide the two parcels into 3 single family lots.
Seventeen feet of additional right of way would have to be dedicated for
proposed lots 1 and 2. Lot 3 as proposed, is not buildable. Staff
recommendation would be to plat lot 3 as an outlot which then could be attached
to Lot 8, Seven Acres if the adjoining neighbor wishes to purchase the parcel.
i
f
Larry Miller, developer, comm ented that the lots may not meet current City
requirements however they are consistent with existing development and he would
like to have 3 buildable lots. Be felt there was enough information for him to
prooeed with the plan.
Dan Duoos owner at Lot 8, Seven Acres commented that he would like to purchase
the proposed our-lo*_ so he could remodel his existing cabin to a year round home.
MM-ION BY AIMM To Awaum THE NWEMER 6, 1986 PRIM LAKE PfANKU G 03*U.SSION
MEETING, SECONDED BY WELLS.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold. Loftus, Roieth. Wells; Absent Larson; the
motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:55 P.M.
Borst N. Graser
city Planner
Angela Jaspers
Aeconung secretary
understanding that the outlot vnuld remain natural and were deeply opposed to
the loss of trees and developing the parcel with smaller lots. Concern was also
expressed that smaller lot size and/or home size may result in a reduction of
property values for existing homeowners.
Discussion by the Commission followed. The Commissioners discussed aspects of
the plat such as minimum lot size and the drainage situation; the PVC overflow
pipe and who would be responsible for maintenance of the pipe to insure it is
kept in working order; and possible ways to redefine lots 1 and 2 to incorporate
additional front footage. it was the consensus of the Commission that the
developer discuss the low slab elevation of lot 3 with the City Engineer in
order to determine whether a lower slab elevation would be appropriate. The
Commission also discussed the equity question and encouraged the neighborhood
and developer to work together to solve the problem of inconsistent street
frontages. The Commissioners consented that this is an unfortunate situation.
The developer is within his rights to develop the property however, more
consideration should be given to the feelings of the neighboring residents.
MOTION BY %)SETH TO APPROVE 7HE PRE,INDSUM PLAT FOR 2ND AMMON TO OAK =0
CDURT SUBJECT M.
1. DEVELOPER BE RESPONSIBLE FOR UTILITY STUBS TO LOP 1.
2. L4V SLAB FOR HOMES ON I(= 1 -3 BE AT OR HIGHER TOM 958.4 ELEVATION.
SECONDED BY WELLS.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Wellal absent Larson; the
motion passed unanimously. Comissioner Roseth requested that all attendees at
the meeting be notified of the next hearing.
N MON BY ARN(IID To am me PUBLIC pp 1 wIN" P OR PRE,INI NARY PLAT APPAOPAL FOR
2ND ADDITION TO OAK RIDGE COURT, SECONDED BY liD3ETH.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Rosetta Wells; absent Larson; the
motion passed unanimously.
* The tape of the hearing will be kept an file in the office of the City Planner
as the official record of this Public Hearing.
At this time a five minute recess was called.
Chairman Loftus called the meeting back to order at 9:15 P.N.
:
The next item on the agenda was discussion of a concept plan for Lot 9, Seen:
Acres and part of Government Lot 6, Section 30. Consultant Planner Tooker
commented on the request to subdivide the two parcels into 3 single family lots.
Seventeen feet of additional right of way would home to be dedicated for
proposed lots 1 and 2. Lot 3 as proposed, is not buildable. Staff
recommendation would be to plat lot 3 as an outlot which then could be attached
to Lot 8, seven Acres if the adjoining neighbor wishes to purchase the parcel.