HomeMy WebLinkAbout8A - Urban Service AreaSTAFF AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
ACTING PLANNING DIRECTOR BLAIR TREMERE
CONSIDERATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP AMENDMENTS
REGARDING THE A-1 AND (AGRICULTURAL) AND C-1
(CONSERVATION) DISTRICTS.
DECEMBER 5, 1994
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
DISCUSSION:
This item is presented for Council discussion of Staff and Planning
Commission findings regarding the purpose of the A-1 and C-1 Zoning
Districts, and actions the City can initiate to remedy certain conflicts with
land which is within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and
which is classified A-1 or C-1 where a key feature is lack of city sewer
and water services.
The City Council on August 1, 1994 directed Staff to review the
Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance to determine whether the
areas designated A-1 and C-1 within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area
(MUSA) should be reclassified to clarify the intent of those districts.
The Staff memoranda of October 21 and 26, which are attached, cover
the basic issues. The information was discussed by the Planning
Commission on October 27.
The Commission concurs that the City should initiate corrective action;
Staff will prepare the necessary notices and schedule a hearing once the
Council has reviewed the information.
Specific corrective steps are listed in the October 26 Staff Memo.
The Agriculture District would serve as a "holding zone" for land that is
not within the MUSA; this is particularly significant for land that the
updated Comprehensive Plan would classify with some designation other
than Agricultural. For example, land designation as Commercial by the
Comprehensive Plan would remain in the Aol (Agricultural) Zoning District
until the land was included in the MUSA and served with water and
sewer. The A-1 land could be used as allowed by the Zoning Ordinance;
when urban services were available, the land could be rezoned to the
urban zoning classification that corresponded with the Comprehensive
Plan designation, say, B-1 (Limited Business).
The suggested actions are "housekeeping" measures to ensure
consistency among the Comprehensive Plan (including the MUSA
constraints), the Zoning Ordinance, and the Zoning Map. The
-1-
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
ISSUES:
ALTERNATIVES:
consistency is vital for the City as the regulator of land use, for the land
owners and residents (established and new), and the developers who
seek to work in the City.
The Planning Commission suggested that the C-1 District be retained in
the rural areas, pending the updating of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff
proposes elimination of this District, using the A-1 district exclusively to
classify land that is rural, i.e., outside the MUSA. The purposes of the
conservation district can be incorporated with the other zoning districts
and the careful analysis of natural features can be made during the
development review process.
The R-1 land in the north part of the City near Pike Lake should have
been reclassified to A-1 when it was annexed a number of years ago. It
should be rezoned to A-1 since it does not have urban services. Staff
recognizes that much of the area has been subdivided and contains
single family homes (a permitted use in the A-1 district); the rezoning to
A-1 would impact the properties with respect to area (minimum lot size)
and dimensions. Thus some non-conforming status would be rendered,
though the uses would still conform. This could be specially addressed in
the text of the Zoning Ordinance if the non-conforming features were
deemed by the Council to be a problem. It is a unique situation and an
undesirable precedent would not be set if that were done.
The Planning Commission suggested that the rezoning hearings be
staged so that, for example, the A-1 and C-1 land within the MUSA could
be considered at one session; the R-1 land outside the MUSA could be
considered at another session; and the deliberation of the C-1 land
outside the MUSA could be conducted at another session. This does not
present particular problems, provided the hearings are held in close
proximity to each other so the overall purpose of corrective action is kept
in tact. It would be appropriate for the Council to consider the total
package at one session, though the actual turnouts at the Planning
Commission may indicate there should be several Council meetings, for
logistical reasons.
The October 26 memorandum discusses a possible option for retaining
the purpose of the C-1 District; namely, an "overlay district" such as the
Shoreland District could be created for those areas now designated C-1.
This is not essential to preserving the protective attributes of the C-1
district since the intent can be incorporated with the other districts. The
overlay district is a technique which some communities find is more
effective. If that technique is desired by the Council, Staff can draft
appropriate ordinance and map materials to implement it; it will take
additional time, however.
Endorse the corrective actions presented in the October 21 and
26, 1994 memoranda and direct Staff to proceed with the
hearings. This can include any special directions the Council
may have (discussed above).
Receive the report from the Staff and Planning Commission and
take no further action.
Table the item for specific reasons.
-2-
RECOMMENDATION:
ACTION REQUIRED:
Attachments:
(CC1205)
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 so that the hearings can be
scheduled for early 1995 and so the final corrective actions can be taken
by the Council before the 1995 development "season," and in concert with
the update of the Comprehensive Plan.
A motion to direct Staff to proceed per Alternative No. 1.
October 21 and 26, 1994 Staff Memoranda
October 27, 1994 Planning Commission Minutes
-3-
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
PLANNING COMMISSION
BLAIR TREMERE
OCTOBER 21, 1994
REVIEW OF A-1 AND Cl ZONING DESIGNATION
The City Council at its August 1, meeting directed Staff to review the City's Comprehensive Plan
and, in particular, the Zoning Ordinance to determine whether the C-1 and the A-1 designated
areas within the Urban Service Area should be redefined to clarify the intent of those districts. A
related question is whether districts should be created which would allow for a "holding zone" for
development of land outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) that does not have
sanitary sewer; and which would allow for a separate designation for property that had special
topographic or aesthetic values. The direction also suggested that areas within the Urban
Service Area should not be classified in a rural or "holding" category if the land otherwise was
eligible for development and could be served.
Staff is prepared to discuss this with the Commission in order to develop a final report to the
City Council with recommendations as to the zoning and planning maps can be clarified.
We have enclosed several items for your consideration, including a copy of the zoning map and
selected pages from the zoning ordinance that describe the purpose of the two districts.
You will have at the meeting large scale maps that show the current Comprehensive Plan land
use designations and graphics prepared by Gina Mitchell which show the land that would be
involved and any changes that may be made to clarify this matter. Specifically, Gina has shown
the A-1 designated outside the MUSA and the A-1 land that is currently inside the MUSA. She
has done the same with the land classified as C-1.
There is another area that the City needs to address in this same vein. An example is at the
north boundary generally north and east of Pike Lake, there is land now zoned R-1 which is
actually an urban designation; this land is outside of the MUSA and should have a
corresponding rural designation. The issue that this area represents is the change to, say, A-1
reflecting the status of lack of utilities, may render some properties in that area nonconforming
(if they were actually developed under the R1 zoning standards). It may be possible to address
that situation specifically in the text of the zoning ordinance thereby mitigating any negative
impacts upon those property owners.
The action that Staff will be recommending is to clarify the designations of A-1 and C-1 by virtue
of both text and map changes. The map changes will require public hearing and Notice to the
property owners who own the subject properties as well as to neighboring property owners. The
text changes will also require public hearing and will require published Notice in the legal
newspaper. At this time, it is entirely feasible to consider having both hearings at the same time.
The thrust of the changes is to ensure that if the purpose of a designation as A-1 is to hold land
in that use category until urban services are available, then all land so classified should be
outside the Urban Service Area.
We will be prepared to discuss this item in further detail at the meeting.
Enc.
BTLT22
SECTION 2 - ZONING MAP AND DISTRICTS
*SEE SECTION 9 SHORELAND DISTRICT FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF
THIS SECTION
2.1 ZONING MAP: A map entitled "Prior Lake Zoning Map' is hereby adopted as part of this
Ordinance. It remains on file at the Office of the City Planner. Said Map and all
notations, references and data shown thereon are hereby incorporated by
reference into this Ordinance. It shall be the duty of the City Planner to maintain
said Map and all amendments thereto shall be recorded within thirty (30) days of
official publication.
2.2
ZONING DISTRICTS: The City is divided into the districts shown by the district
boundaries on the Zoning Map. The districts are:
A-1
A-1 Agricultural
R-1 Urban Residential
R-2 Urban Residential
R-3 Multiple Residential
R-4 Mixed Code Residential
B-1 Limited Business
B-2 Community Business
B-3 General Business
B-P Business Park
I-2 Light Industrial
C-1 Conservation
S-D Shoreland District
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT is intended to protect existing agricultural investments until
such time as public utilities may be extended and there is a need for additional urban
development land.
R.1
R-2
SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT is established to provide extensive areas within
the community for iow density development with full public utilities in a sequence which
will prevent the occurrence of premature scattered urban development.
URBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT is intended as a medium density area of the City
incorporating small lot single family construction as well as duplexes, townhouses, and
quad homes.
R-3
MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT is proposed to provide areas of the City which will
allow multiple dwellings in areas close to business and services, public facilities and good
transportation. The primary guide for this area would be as outlined in the City
Comprehensive Plan.
R-4
MIXED CODE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT is established to provide areas of the City
where manufactured housing may be located on either subdivided or unsubdivided
developments in attractive neighborhoods with all urban services indicated as medium
density in the Comprehensive Plan.
B-1
LIMITED BUSINESS DISTRICT is intended to provide areas related to or adjoining high
and medium density residential areas on major streets for offices, retail and service
establishments.
B-2
COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT is proposed to identify downtown Pdor Lake
allowing general commercial uses somewhat less restrictive than found within the B-1
Limited Business District.
B-3
GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT is intended to provide an area for commercial uses
which due to their size and nature would not conform to other business districts.
BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT is intended to promote high standards of design and
construction for business park uses in the City. These standards are set forth in order to
enhance the visual appearance of each Business Park District within the City, to preserve
I-2
S-D
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT is intended to provide areas of the community which will
allow general industrial uses which clue to their size and nature would not contorm to the
Special Industrial District.
CONSERVATION DISTRICT is provided to recognize vital environmental resources of
the community as steep slopes, wetland and unstable soil conditions and allow
development only after careful analysis.
SHORELAND DISTRICT is established to protect water and shoreland resoumes
from unwise development and water pollution and to preserve economic and natural
environmental qualities of the 'shoreland environment. Land located within the following
distances from protected waters is considered to be within the Shoreland District: 1000
feet from the ordinary high water mark of a lake, pond, or fiowage and 300 feet trom a
river or stream, or the landward extent of a flood plain on such river or stream, whichever
is greater.
SECTION 3 - PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES
* SEE SECTION 9 SHORELAND DISTRICT FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
OF THIS SECTION
3.1 - PERMI'i-rED USES: The permitted uses for each district are listed below. Accessory
uses and essential services are also permitted.
3.2 CONDITIONAL USES: The City Council may authorize conditional uses as specified
below and others similar in nature, which will not be detrimental to the integrity of
the districts, if all of the conditions and provisions of Section 7 are met.
PERMI'I'FED USES
10.
11.
12.
5.
6.
7.
8.
10.
Agricultural & Forest
Single Family Dwellings
Public Parks & Playgrounds
Public & Parochial Schools
Golf Courses
Specialized Animal Raising
Stables & Riding Academies
Churches
Nurseries & Greenhouses
Travel Trailer & Boat Storage
Truck Gardening
Agricultural Preserve (Od 93-12)
Agriculture
Single Family Dwellings
Public & Parochial Schools
Public Parks & Playgrounds
Churches
Golf Courses
Truck Gardening
Licensed day care facilities
for 12 or fewer persons.
State licensed res. facilities
for 6 or fewer persons.
Licensed group family day care
facilities for 14 or fewer
children. (Ord 93-14)
CONDITIONAL USES
A-1 AGRICULTURAL
1. Animal Kennels
2. Commercial Recreation
(Ord. 85-08)
3. Public Buildings
4. Public Utility
Buildings
5. Airports
6. Water&Sewage
Treatment Plants
7. Sanitary Land Fills
8. Cemeteries
9. Equipment &
Maintenance Storage
10. Radio & TV Stations
11. Manufactured Housing
12. Animal Feed Lots for
more than 10 Animals
13. Limited Retreat (Ord.
86-09)
R-1 SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
13.
Cemeteries
Hospitals & Clinics
PublicUtility
Buildings
Public Buildings
Two Family Dwellings
Townhouses
Planned Unit
Development
Open Land
Recreational Uses
Nurseries &
Greenhouses
Private Clubs &
Schools
Charitable
Institutions
Animal Kennels
Boarding Houses
PERMri"rED USES
R-1 SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL
,, 14.
15.
2.
3.
4.
o
Single Family Dwellings
Two Family Dwellings
Public & Parochial Schools
Public Parks & Playgrounds
Churches
R-2 URBAN RESIDENTIAL
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
3.
4.
5.
Townhouses
Multiple Family Dwellings
Public & Parochial Schools
Public Parks & Playgrounds
Churches
Funeral Homes
R.3 MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
CONDITIONAL USES
Existing Neighborhood
Commercial Recreation
Services
Public Parking Lots
(Ord. 90-07)
Cemeteries
Nursing Homes
Hospitals & Clinics
Public Utility
Buildings
Public Buildings
Private Clubs &
Schools
Licensed day care
facilities for 13 or
more persons.
Funeral Homes
Townhouses
Multiple Family
Dwellings
Planned Unit
Development
Charitable
Institutions
Boarding Houses
Marina
Existing Neighborhood
Commercial Recreation
Services
Openland Recreational
Use
Public Parking Lots
(Ord. 90-07)
State licensed resid.
facilities for 7-16
persons.
SingleFamily
Dwellings
Two Family Dwellings
Nursing Homes
Hospitals & Clinics
PublicUtility
Buildings
Public Buildings
Private Clubs &
Schools
Planned Unit
Development
Charitable
Institutions
Boarding Houses
PERMITTED USES
o
CONDITIONAL USES
11. Marina
12. Licensed day care
facilities for 13 or
more persons.
Care Centers for more
than 16 children
13. Public Parking Lots
14. State licensed res
· facilities serving
7 - 16 persons.
Manufactured Single Family
Dwellings
Single Family Dwellings
R-4 MIXED CODE RESIDENTIAL
Two Family Dwellings
Public & Parochial Schools
Public Parks & Playgrounds
Churches
Retail Business
Personal Services
1. Public Buildings
2. Private Clubs&
Schools
3. Licensed day care
facilities for 13 or
more persons.
4. Townhouses
5. Multiple Family
Dwellings
6. Charitable
Institutions
7. Public Parking Lots
(Ord. 90-07)
8. State licensed res.
facilities for 7-16
persons.
Funeral Homes
Clinics
Offices & Banks
Business & ProfesSional Office
Nursery Schools & Day Care
Centers for more than 12 children
Retail Business
Eating & Drinking Places
B-1 LIMITED BUSINESS
1.
2.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
B-2 COMMUNITY BUSINESS
1.
2.
Eating & Drinking
Places
Motor Fuel Stations
with repair limited
to auto repair minor
(Ord. 85-08)
Public Buildings
Public Utility
Buildings
Fast Food
Private Club - Health
Club
Theaters & Assembly
Ag. Product Stands
Automobile Repair
Minor (Ord. 85-08)
Car Wash (Oral 87-09)
Research
laboratories
Public Utility
Buildings
PERMII'rED USES CONDITIONAL USES
B-2 COMMUNITY BUSINESS
3. Offices & Banks
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
4. Personal & Professional Services
5. Business Service
6. Public Buildings
7. Parking Lots
o
9.
10.
Wholesale Business
Commercial Schools
Hospitals & Clinics
11. ' Automobile Sales (Ord. 85-08)
12. Motor Fuel Station
13. Funeral Homes
14. Private Club - Health Club
15. Theaters & Assembly
16. Automobile Repair Minor(Od. 85-08)
17. Automobile Repair Major (Od 83-6)(Od.85-08)
B-3 GENERAL BUSINESS
Retail Business (Ord. 85-08)
Automobile Sales
Multiple Family
Dwellings
Home & Trailer Sales
& Display
Farm Implement Sales
Services & Repair
Supply Yards
Commercial
Recreation
Hotels & Motels
Animal Clinics
Recreation Equipment,
Sales & Repair
Fast Food
Newspaper Publishing
Blueprinting/Photostatic
Ag. Products Stands
Car Wash (Ord. 88-07)
Eating & Drinking Places
Hotels & Motels
5. Wholesale Business
6. Supply Yards
8.
9,
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17
Funeral Homes
Commercial Recreation
Home & Trailer Sales & Display
Animal Clinics
Parking Lots
Recreation Equipment, Sales
Service & Repair
Motor Fuel Stations
Private Club - Health Club
Day Care Facilities (Ord. 84-02)
Automobile Repair Minor(Ord.85-08)
Automobile Repair Major (Ord.84-2 Ord.85-8)
B-P BUSINESS PARK
See Section 6.14 herein
for a complete listing.
(Ord. 93-18)
1. Public Buildings
2. Public Utility
Buildings
3. Fast Food
Establishments
4. Personal&
Professional Services
5. Farm Implement Sales
Service & Repair
6. Equipment & Storage
Yards
7. Radio & T.V. Stations
8. Car Wash
9. Outdoor Sales
10. Theaters & Clinics
11. Hospitals & Clinics
12. Research
Laboratories
13. Testing Laboratories
14. Ag. Product Stands
15. Mini-Storage Units
See Section 6.14 herein
tora complete listing.
(Ord. 93-18)
10
PERMITI'ED USES CONDITIONAL USES
Light Manufacturing
Research Laboratories
3. Testing Laboratories
4. Offices
5. Supply Yards
6. Warehousing
7. Truck Terminals
8. Public Parking
9. Parking Lots
I-2 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
10. Mini-Storage Units
1. Agriculture
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
C-1 CONSERVATION
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Single Family Dwellings
Camps & Cottages
Public Parks & Playgrounds
Public & Parochial Schools
Hunting Preserves
Golf Courses
Specialized Animal Raising
Stables & Riding Academies
Public Buildings
Marina (Ord. 83-6)
Wholesale Plant Nurseries (Ord 90-07)
Agricultural Preserve (Ord 93-12)
Manufacturing
Public Utility
Buildings
Water & Sewer
Treatment Facilities
Airports
Truck & Railroad
Terminals
Grain Elevators
Commercial
Recreation
Animal Clinics
Food Product
Processing
Water&Sewer
Treatment Facilities
Commercial
Recreation
Airports
Cemeteries
Radio & TV Stations
Sanitary Land Fills
Animal Clinics
Animal Feed Lots For
more than 10 animals
11
4.3
AGRICULTURAL PRESERVES: Upon certification by the City Council that certain lands
in the City are planned for long term agricultural use in the Comprehensive Plan,
and zoned A-'I Agricultural and/or C-1 Conservation on the Zoning Map, owners
~ of said lands may make application for agricultural preserve status requiring a
maximum residential density at one unit per quarter/quarter section (average of
one dwelling per 40 acres). Application may be initiated on a form provided by
the City.
A. Minimum Acreage: The minimum acreage is forty (40) acres, but smaller parcels
will be considered eligible under the following conditions:
1. Noncontiguous parcels at least ten (10) acres in size and aggregating
forty (40) or more acres may be eligible if they are farmed together as a
unit.
2. The minimum acreage requirement may be reduced to thirty-five (:35)
acres if the land is located within a single quarter/quarter se~ion and the
amount less than forty (40) acres is due to a public right-of°way or a
disturbance in the rectangular survey system leaving a quarter/quarter of
less than ~or~y (40) acres.
The minimum acreage can be reduced to twenty (20) acres if It is
adiacent to eligible land on not less than two (2) sides and the following
conditions are met:
a) The land area predominantly comprises Class l, II, III, or irrigated
Class IV land according to the Land Capability Classification
Systems of the Soil Conservation Service and the County Soil
Survey; and
b) The City Council considers the land to be
an essential part of the agricultural region; and
c) The parcel was a parcel of record prior to January 1, 1980; or the
land was an agricultural preserve prior to becoming a separate
parcel of a least twenty (20) acres.
4. Contiguous Municipally-certified land meeting the total acreage
requirements, but located in adjoining municipality as well as in Prior
Lake so that the minimum acreage requirement is not met in one or more
jurisdictions, is eligible through joint resolution of the affected local
governments.
B. Duration: An agricultural preserve continues indefinitely until either the owner or
the City initiates expiration, after which the duration is eight (8) years. A land
owner may initiate expiration by notifying the City on a form provided.. The City
may initiate expiration by changing the planning and zoning so that the land is no
longer planned for long-term agricultural use or is rezoned to another use. (Ord.
84-02)
C. Where there are two or more contiguous quarter/quarter sections under single
ownership, the owner may, by Conditional Use Permit, cluster the permitted
number of dwelling units in one quarter/quarter section. All lots created under this
provision must meet all of the other distdct requirements, including those for
setbacks, driveway spacing and lot area. One of the conditions of approval shall
be the filing and recording of an agreement signed by all of the affected property
owners, relinquishing any right to a residential building site on the quarter/quarter
section from which the building site eligibility has been transferred. (Ord. 90-05);
(Ord. 93-12)
4,
18
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Acting Planning Director Blair Tremere
SUBJECT: A-1 and C-1 Zoning Districts
DATE: October 26, 1994
This is a supplement to my October 21 memorandum which is scheduled
for discussion at the October 27 meeting.
The task, per the Council directive, is to ensure that the City's
land use regulations and plans, particularly the zoning map, zoning
ordinance, the comprehensive plan text, and the comprehensive land
use guide plan map, accurately and consistently reflect the rural
(no municipal sewer and water available) and urban (municipal sewer
and water available) areas.
The directive stems from the observation that the zoning ordinance
and map now reflect two distinct districts, A-1 (Agricultural) and
C-1 (Conservation) that were established to preserve "rural", or
"natural" characteristics, yet can be found in areas where
municipal services are available.
The Zoning Map reflects another inconsistency: the area north and
east of Pike Lake is in the R-1 district, contains platted lots
(many of which have single family homes), and some agriculture (an
allowed conditional use), yet does not have urban services. It
should have been zoned A-1 when it came into the city.
Here are several corrective actions which will address the basic
problems of inconsistency and the need for clarification. Related
planning and zoning issues may evolve as the City considers these
and other matters which will arise during the updating of the
Comprehensive Plan. These steps, however, can be implemented in
the short term without negative impact upon future planning and
regulatory efforts.
Clarify the definition of the A-1 District by adding
language that stresses the "holding zone" purpose. A
revised definition might read:
Agriculture District--intended for areas where
urban services and public utilities are not
available, where a rural density will retain the
land in a natural state and in agricultural uses
pending the proper timing for the economical
provision of utilities, streets, parks, storm
drainage, and related services so that orderly
development will occur. Rezoning and subdivision
of land in this district for urban development
allowed in districts which implement the
Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan will be
considered only when the required public facilities
and services have been ordered for extension to the
property.
Repeal the Zoning Ordinance language that establishes a
Conservation District. This would specifically involve
the definition in Section 2, the list of permitted and
conditional uses in Section 3, and the lot and yard
requirements in Section 4. Other incidental references
to the Conservation District that may exist in the text
throughout the ordinance would be deleted, too.
Amend the Zoning Map by rezoning all land now in the C-1
District to either A-l, for the land outside the
Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA), or R-l, for the
land inside the MUSA.
Note: some land inside the MUSA could be eventually
rezoned to another urban district, including some non-
residential classification.
Amend the Zoning Map by rezoning all land that is now in
both the A-1 District and the MUSA to R-1.
Note: this applies to a specific geographic area with
particular existing characteristics, e.g., the platted
and occupied lots. It appears, at this time, that no
property would be adversely impacted by the
reclassification since the actual uses are allowed in
both the R-1 and A-1 districts. However, most of the
land which has been subdivided, would become non-
conforming as to area. We will review this with the City
Attorney and possibly develop special language which
could recognize the relative uniqueness of the situation
for this area. In any case, the urban R-1 designation is
inappropriate and should be changed.
Amend the Zoning Map by rezoning all land that is outside
the MUSA but is in the R-1 district to A-1.
The rezonings and the text amendments would be initiated by the
city and all property owners as well as neighboring owners would be
notified of the scheduled public hearing(s). The notice will
include an explanation of the purpose of the action.
It is important to note the fate of the Conservation District,
whose purpose and intent are not questioned; the problem is in the
current implementation. There are a couple of options that some
communities have successfully implemented.
First, the language in the current definition could be adopted as
a general requirement applicable throughout the City in all zoning
districts. The city effectively does this now, partially due to
state-mandated rules (wetland, shoreland, and environmental
regulations, for example), and partially due to local concerns for
preservation and protection of natural amenities.
Second, a special "overlay" protection district could be adopted.
This would be similar in form to the existing Shoreland District
(see Zoning Map); the specific areas covered by the overlay could
be those now zoned C-1. The key difference is that there would be
an underlying zoning district that allowed particular uses that
were subject also to special requirements defined in the Zoning
Ordinance.
The second option will take some time to properly draft and
evaluate, but it is feasible if the City desires the extra measure
of protection as a matter of local policy.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Loftus, Vonhof and Kuykendall. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM H - WORKSHOP - DISCUSS C-1 CONRERVATION DISTRICT - URBAN/RURAL
SERVICE AREA CLASSWICATION
Assistant Planning Director, Deb Gan'om, gave a brief history of the commmity and explained that many
zoning districts were established and carded over from most of the land annexed into the community.
Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance definitions, permitted and conditional uses were reviewed for
the Agricultural and Conservation Districts.
Discussion by Comrrfissioners included: reclassification of A-1 and C-1 zones outside the MUSA to a "HZ"
(Holding Zone) classification to be consistent wilh the Comprehensive Plan; a Holding Zone would be the
designated land use until utilities would becorm available; state acts such as the Wetland Conservation Act
and zoning restrictions such as a Tree Preservation Ordinance would be used to protect natural feo_ _rares; R-1
Zone in Taus Addition should be redesigned to another zone classification; set zoning discussions in stages.
A recess was called at 8:57 pan. The meeting reconvened at 9:03 p.m.
ITEMHI- DISCUSSION- UPDATE ON STATUS OF TI-IE WILDS PUD
Assistant Planning Director Deb Garross gave an UlXJate on The WiJds PUD Plan and the development
sums of the single family homes, multi-family, comraxcial and a golf course. Associate Planner Gina
Mitchell is researching all of The W'dds Ordinances, PUD, and land uses, to put together information as a
reference document.
Discussion by Commissioners include& some developers do not have a clear understanding of the PUD
Plan and ordinances; The Wilds was approved the Fall of 1993; several potential amendments may be
submitted in the near furore such as temporarily relocating the sales office which may become the
temporary club house; private street concept; hotel; reduction of multiple farm]y units and development
options for comnemial sites.
Discussion on The Wilds Second Addition included: pmcedme for platting outlots, PUD Ammdment or
preliminary plat and final plats; impact of declining ratio of multi-family units; and tax impact. The
Business Development Committee should be involved in any potential co~ial changes in the PUD.
The Metropolitan Council Regional Blueprint was handed out for reference.
Commissioner Vonhof participated on a panel that interviewed candidates for the position of Planning
Director. Selection should be made soon and possibly on staff in 30 days.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY KUYKEND~I I.~ TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Arnold, Kuykendall, Roseth, and Vonhof. MOTION CARRIED.
The meeting adjourned at 9:52 p.m. Tapes of the meeting are on file at City Hall.
Deb Garross Connie Carlson
Assistant City Planner Recording Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 27, 1994
Page 2