Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10D - Comp Amd Deerfield Ind CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: MAY 3, 2004 10D JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR 13.86 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE PROPOSED DEERFIELD INDUSTRIAL PARK FROM C-BO TO I-PI(Case File #04-45) Introduction: Deerfield Development has filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a portion of the 60.1 acres of vacant property located east of Fish Point Road, on the east side of the Deerfield Development and south of Cottonwood Lane and Adelmann Street. The proposal is to change 13.86 acres from C-BO (Business Office Park) to I-PI (planned Industrial) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Background: This property is the easterly portion of the 260 acres of land which was annexed by order of the Minnesota Municipal Board on July 9, 1997. In September, 1997, the owner submitted an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include this land within the MUSA, and to designate the easterly 58 acres for Planned Industrial Uses, 140 acres to the R-HD designation and 62 acres to the R - L/MD designation. On October 6, 1997, the Council approved the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan which included the entire area within the MUSA. The City Council also approved an amendment to the Land Use Plan designating the 58 acres for Business Park uses, and the remaining acreage for Low to Medium Density Residential uses. In 2003, the applicant requested the following amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the area within the Deerfield Industrial Park: · Change 6.14 acres from C-BO (Business Office Park) to C-CC (General Business) . Change 13.35 acres from C-BO (Business Office Park) to I-PI (planned Industrial) · Change 4.25 acres from R-L/MD (Low to Medium Density Residential) to R-HD (High Density Residential) 1:\04 files\04 comp amend\deerfield industrial\cc report. doc www.cityofpriorlake.com Page 1 Phone 952.447.4230 1 Fax 952.447.4245 The City Council approved these amendments on March 17, 2003, and on May 5,2003. The remainder of the 60 acres, approximately 35 acres, continued to be designated as C-BO (Business Office Park). This application pertains to 13.86 acres of land located on the west side of the property, immediately east of Deerfield 11th. This property is identified as Outlot D on the proposed Deerfield Industrial Park preliminary plat. This property is presently designated as C-BO, and is zoned C-5. The applicant is proposing to change the Land Use Plan Map designation from C-BO to I-PI (planned Industrial). The remaining acreage will continue to be designated as C-BO. The Planning Commission reviewed this request at a public hearing on April 12, 2004. The Commission voted to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment to the I-PI designation on the basis that the proposed designations are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives, and there is a need for additional industrial land. Current Circumstances: The site under consideration consists of 13.86 acres. Most of the site drains towards a wetland on the west side of the site. Access to this property will be from Adelmann Street as platted in the Deerfield Industrial Park. Sewer and water service will also be extended as part of the Deerfield Industrial Park development. On April 19, 2004, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for Deerfield Industrial Park. To the north of this property is vacant land, designated as R-HD (High Density Residential) and zoned R-4 (High Density Residential). To the west of this property is the Deerfield development, zoned R-2. To the east is vacant land, zoned C-5 (Business Office Park) and to the south is vacant land zoned 1-1 (Industrial). The Issues: The applicant is proposing to develop the Deerfield industrial area in stages. According to the letter submitted with the application, there have been more potential clients for land designated and zoned 1-1 than for the C-5 area. The applicant has not identified any specific uses for this area. The Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives that apply to the request for I-PI are as follows: GOAL: ECONOMIC VITALITY: Pursue a prudent use of available resources and the optimum functioning of economic systems. 1:\04 files\04 comp amend\deerfield industria1\cc report. doc Page 2 OBJECTIVE No.1: Determine and strive for a balance of commerce, industry, and population. OBJECTIVE No.2: Encourage a diversified economic base and a broad range of employment opportunities. OBJECTIVE No.3: Promote sound land use. OBJECTWE No.4: Maintain high standards in the promotion and development of commerce and industry. The proposed I-PI designation is consistent with these goals, as is the existing C- BO designation. The area is currently designated for a combination of business and industrial uses. The proposed I-PI designation allows a more intensive type of use, including outdoor storage, than the C- BO designation. In addition, there are more design controls within the C-BO designation than in the I-PI. However, the Zoning Ordinance still has design criteria for this district. The recent McCombs study (see attached summary) identified the need for an additional 135-185 acres of additional Business Office Park area. The proposed amendment, while allowing many of the same warehouse and office uses, will reduce the amount of available C-BO designated land. The amendment will also increase the potential for higher intensity industrial uses. The Planning staff can make arguments both for and against this request. Arguments supporting the request include: . The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. . The amendment may accelerate development within the Deerfield Industrial Park. . Many of the uses permitted in the Industrial district are similar to the uses permitted in the Business Office Park. . The Zoning Ordinance includes design standards intended to protect adjacent residential uses from the industrial uses. Arguments for maintaining the existing C-BO designation include: . The existing designation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. . The proposed Industrial designation allows more intensive uses, including outdoor storage, that may not be appropriate directly adjacent to the residential uses. . The Zoning Ordinance includes higher design standards for uses within the existing designation. 1:\04 files\04 comp amend\deerfield industria1\cc report. doc Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT: ALTERNATIVES: RECOMMENDED MOTION: · The McCombs study identifies the need for C- BO designated land over the next 20 years. Whether or not to approve this amendment seems to be a question of timing. If the City Council feels the most important goal is to accelerate the development of the Deerfield Industrial Park, approval of the proposed I-PI designation is appropriate. If, on the other hand, the Council feels the type of development and businesses within the Deerfield Industrial Park are more important, regardless of the time it takes, a denial of this request would be in order. Shown below is a breakdown of the guiding of the Deerfield Industrial Park before and after this proposed amendment. GUIDING PRESENT ACRES PROPOSED ACRES R-HD 4.25 4.25 C-CC 6.14 6.14 C-BO 34.26 20.40 I-PI 13.35 27.21 TOTAL 58 58 Conclusion: The Planning Commission concluded there was a need for additional I-PI land and recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the I-PI designation. This designation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and is not significantly different from the current C-BO designation. Budget Impact: There is no direct budget impact involved in this request. The City Council has three alternatives: 1. Adopt a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan as requested. 2. Continue the review for specific information or reasons per City Council discussion. 3. Find the Comprehensive Plan amendment inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and deny the request. In this case staff should be directed to prepare a resolution with findings of fact. The Planning Commission recommends Alternative #1. The following motion is required: 1. A motion and second to adopt a resolution approving the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to designate the 13.86 acres as Planned Industrial (I -PI) is r uired. 1:\04 files\04 comp amendldeerfield industrial\cc ~ Page 4 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 RESOLUTION 04-XX RESOLUTION APPROVING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 114, RANGE 22 MOTION BY: SECOND BY: RECITALS WHEREAS, Deerfield Development submitted an application for an amendment to the City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change the designation of the following described property from the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to the I-PI (Planned Industrial) designation: 1:\04 files\04 comp amend\deerfield industrial\approve res.doc www.cityofpriorlake.com Page 1 Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245 and WHEREAS, Legal notice of the public hearing was duly published and mailed in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and Prior Lake City Code; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 12, 2004, for those interested in this request to present their views; and WHEREAS, On April 12, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan on the basis the I-PI designation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, On May 3, 2004, the Prior Lake City Council considered the proposed amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to designate the above described property to the I-PI designation and; WHEREAS, The City Council received the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment along with the staff reports; and WHEREAS, The City Council has carefully considered the testimony, staff reports and other pertinent information contained in the record of decision of this case. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA, that: 1. The above recitals are herein fully incorporated herein as set forth above. 2. The proposed amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to designate the following described property as I-PI (Planned Industrial) is hereby approved: That part of the Northeast Quarter and the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, which lies southerly and westerly of Registered Land Survey No. 98, Files of Registrar of Titles, Scott County, Minnesota and which lies northerly and westerly of Registered Land Survey No. 128, Files of Registrar of Titles, Scott County, Minnesota, and which lies easterly of Deerfield Eleventh, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Registered Land Survey No. 128; thence North 00 degrees 25 minutes 24 seconds East, along the east line of said Northeast Quarter, a distance of 315.10 feet; thence North 89 degrees 27 minutes 21 seconds West, a distance f 658.28 feet; thence southwesterly 115.68 feet along a tangential curve to the left, having a radius of 355.00 feet and a central angle of 18 degrees 40 minutes 13 seconds; thence westerly 321.90 feet along a reverse curve to the right, having a radius of 280.00 feet and a central angle of 65 degrees 52 minutes 07 seconds; thence northwesterly 11.32 feet along a reverse curve to the left, having a radius of 530.00 feet and a central angle of 01 degree 13 minutes 26 seconds to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence South 44 degrees 28 minutes 10 seconds West, not tangent to said curve, a distance of 260.87 feet; thence South 59 degrees 08 minutes 30 seconds West, a distance of 281.90 feet; thence South 22 degrees 57 minutes 28 seconds West, a distance of 304.17 feet to the northerly 1:\04 files\04 comp amend\deerfield industrial\approve res.doc Page 2 line of said Registered Land Survey No. 128; thence North 89 degrees 20 minutes 55 seconds West, along the northerly line of said Registered Land Survey No. 128, a distance of 182.22 feet to the southeast corner of said DEERFIELD ELEVENTH; thence northerly and northwesterly along the easterly line of said DEERFIELD ELEVENTH to the northeast comer thereof; thence North 39 degrees 01 minute 11 seconds East, a distance of 133.46 feet; thence southeasterly 45.39 feet, along a nontangential curve to the left, having a radius of 290.16 feet, a central angle of 8 degrees 57 minutes 43 seconds, a chord length of 45.34 feet and a chord bearing of South 55 degrees 27 minutes 40 seconds East; thence South 59 degrees 56 minutes 31 seconds East, tangent to said curve, a distance of 1098.24 feet; thence southeasterly 152.27 feet along a tangential curve to the right, having a radius of 530.00 feet and a central angle of 16 degrees 27 minutes 38 seconds to the point of beginning. 3. Approval of this amendment is subject to the approval of the Metropolitan Council. Passed and adopted this 3rd day of May, 2004. YES NO Haugen Haugen Blomberg Blomberg LeMair LeMair Petersen Petersen Zieska Zieska {Seal} Frank Boyles, City Manager City of Prior Lake 1:\04 files\04 comp amend\deerfield industrial\approve res.doc Page 3 "------- .~' Planning Commission Minutes April J 2, 2004 COMMENDING APPROVAL TAFF'S CONDITIONS WITH THE This item . go before the City Council 0 * B. Case #04-45 Deerfield Development is requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation on 13.86 acres from C-BO to I-PI on property located east of the Deerfield development. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated April 12, 2004, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Deerfield Development has filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a portion of the 60.1 acres of vacant property located east ofFish Point Road, on the east side of the Deerfield Development and south of Cottonwood Lane and Adelmann Street. The proposal is to change 13.86 acres from C-BO (Business Office Park) to I-PI (Planned Industrial) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. This property is the easterly portion of the 260 acres of land which was annexed by order of the Minnesota Municipal Board on July 9, 1997. In September, 1997, the owner submitted an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include this land within the MUSA, and to designate the easterly 58 acres for Planned Industrial Uses, 140 acres to the R-HD designation and 62 acres to the R-L/MD designation. On October 6, 1997, the Council approved the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan which included the entire area within the MUSA. The City Council also approved an amendment to the Land Use Plan designating the 58 acres for Business Park uses, and the remaining acreage for Low to Medium Density Residential uses. In 2003, the applicant requested the following amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the area within the Deerfield Industrial Park: . Change 6.14 acres from C-BO (Business Office Park) to C-CC (General Business) . Change 13.35 acres from C-BO (Business Office Park) to I-PI (planned Industrial) . Change 4.25 acres from R-LIMD (Low to Medium Density Residential) to R-HD (High Density Residential) The City Council approved these amendments on March 17,2003, and on May 5, 2003. The remainder of the 60 acres, approximately 35 acres, continued to be designated as C- BO (Business Office Park). L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMIS\04pc Minutes\MN041204.doc 7 Planning Commission Minutes April 12, 2004 This application pertains to 13.86 acres of land located on the west side of the property, immediately east of Deerfield 11 th. This property is identified as Outlot D on the proposed Deerfield Industrial Park preliminary plat. This property is presently designated as C-BO, and is zoned C-5. The applicant is proposing to change the Land Use Plan Map designation from C-BO to I-PI (planned Industrial). The remaining acreage will continue to be designated as C-BO. The applicant is proposing to develop the Deerfield industrial area in stages. According to the letter submitted with the application, there have been more potential clients for land designated and zoned 1-1 than for the C-5 area. The applicant has not identified any specific uses for this area. The proposed I-PI designation is consistent with these goals, as is the existing C-BO designation. The area is currently designated for a combination of business and industrial uses. The proposed I-PI designation allows a more intensive type of use, including outdoor storage, than the C-BO designation. In addition, there are more design controls within the C-BO designation than in the I-PI. However, the Zoning Ordinance still has design criteria for this district. The recent McCombs study identified the need for an additional 135-185 acres of additional Business Office Park area. The proposed amendment, while allowing many of the same warehouse and office uses, will reduce the amount of available C-BO designated land. The amendment will also increase the potential for higher intensity industrial uses. Atwood questioned the differences with the industrial and commercial districts. Kansier explained. Perez asked if the proposed amendment would have any affect on the preliminary plat. Kansier said it would not. Lemke asked to list some of the uses and types of businesses that fit this designation. Kansier said the area would be subdivided and explained the C5 district uses. The biggest difference is the outdoor storage and the intensity of the uses permitted. The industrial district allows auto repair, body shops, etc. Comments from the public: John Mesenbrink, Eagle Creek Development said he would be available for questions. Stamson asked why he wanted to change the designation when nothing is built in the other I -district. Mesenbrink responded the other "I" is pretty much sold. If everything goes good and continue with the plat there will not be a lot left in the first phase. There is absolutely no one showing any interest in the C5. One customer is looking for 45,000 square feet and needs outside storage. L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMIS\04pc Minutes\MN041204.doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes April 12, 2004 Stamson asked what kind of uses are interested in this area. Mesenbrink responded there was a potential for four different uses. Prior Lake Blacktop, a bus transportation company and an insulation company. Most need outside storage that cannot be provided in the C5. Originally they had a lot interest in the C-5 area however; they do not have the interest at this time. That is why they are requesting to rezone to the I district. There were no comments and the hearing was closed at 7:20 p.m. Comments from the Commissioners: Ringstad: · The part that tips for me is the McComb Study indicating there is a need for business office park. Does not see the need to change. With that in mind, will not support unless he hears compelling arguments. Lemke asked ifhe knew what the use would be for the one customer. Mesenbrink said he did not want to reveal the name at this time as they have another year and half left on their lease. They have between 35 and 40 employees. Lemke questioned if the McCombs Study identified the need for any industrial? Community Development Director John Sullivan said the McComb did address the needs for different categories and space. One category mentioned was a business park. Another thing is that it was lumped in one category as far as the business park is concerned. In that business park you could have manufacturing and enclosed areas. The study's real focus was on retail so there was room for the industrial district. Sulliv~ said he was working with 16 different businesses that are either interested in expanding or locating in Prior Lake. Many would not fit in the C5 zoning. They would fit in the 11 zone because of needed outside storage. They make a product, have active inventory and may have truck deliveries and so on. Meeting with businesses as they come in Sullivan feels there is a need for an Industrial area that would meet most needs. Sullivan supported the rezoning amendment. Rye pointed out the Commissioners would be talking later in the meeting about the potential comprehensive changes. One of the things that came out of the McComb Study is that under our current Comprehensive Plan the City probably has more land designated for business park use than we could reasonably expect to use up over the next 20 to 25 years. Rye went on to say although he (McCombs) did not come out and say it in the report but in conversations, indicated this area does not lend itself way to the heavy kind of manufacturing activities. It does lend itself to the kind of things the City has been seeing. There is a lack of opportunity for some of these other uses that tend to be a necessary part of the community. It is very difficult to find a place to put them. L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMIS\04 pc Minutes\MN041204.doc 9 Planning Commission Minutes April 12. 2004 Lemke: . Gave this a lot of thought, and realizes there is a residential neighborhood area near it. Although there are a lot of trees and not so sure when someone came to do something that leaving the trees there may not be the adequate buffer we're looking for. . Looking at our City goals we want to encourage a diversified economic base and a broad range of employment opportunities. This very well meets the City's objectives. . Nobody was present to speak against it. . Will support the change. Perez: . Saw both sides of this. John Sullivan had good points. Would rather capture some of the businesses now rather than waiting. Then again no really came with an dissenting objections. . Support. Atwood: . Asked if the surrounding residents were notified. Kansier said they were. . Would not recommend support because of the McCombs study. There are other areas that will meet the needs of light industrial. . This area is so small and close to a residential area that we can find another site. . Accelerating development does not m.ake a case for supporting this request. Does not see this as important and neighbor friendly. Stamson: . Started out more skeptical that we didn't need anymore 11 districts, however the applicant and Community Development Director (Sullivan) convinced me this is a reasonable request. We tend to think of industrial as smokestacks and large commercial manufacturing. We have a lot of businesses around town that need outside storage. I do see the need for more 11. . Came to a different conclusion than Atwood with the McComb Study. . The biggest concern is the adjacent neighbors. . Questioned the buffer requirements between the districts. Kansier said outside storage requires a conditional use permit which would require a public hearing. . Rye explained the general buffering requirements between the districts would be the most stringent and highest category of buffer setbacks. . There would also be a Conditional Use Permit process. . Comfortable this would not have negative impact on the neighborhood. Will support the amendment. There is a need for it in the City and appropriate safeguards in place to make sure the neighborhood is not harmed by it. L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMIS\04 pc Minutes\MN041204.doc 10 Planning Commission Minutes April 12, 2004 Perez: · Regarding Atwood's comments on accelerating this. The applicant stated one company is looking at this fairly quick. Would hate to loose a company because we didn't do this. · Atwood disagreed stating this should not be business driven by a request that is a "potential". There is nothing concrete. MOTION BY PEREZ, SECOND BY LEMKE, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AS REQUESTED. All in favor Perez, Lemke and Stamson, nays by Atwood and Ringstad. MOTION CARRIED. This item will go to City Council on May 3, 2004. Case #04-43 and 04-44 Shamrock Development is requesti an amendment to T Wilds PUD Plan and to approve a preliminary plat consi g of 51 acres to be sub · ded into 63 lots for single family development. This roperty is located south of 42 and Haas Lake, and east of Wilds Parkw , at the northeast end of Wilds Rid Planning Coordinat Jane Kansier presented the Plannin eport dated April 12, 2004, on file in the office 0 e City Planning Department. Shamrock Development h applied for approval 0 development to be known as The Wilds Ridge on the property ated south of CS 42 and Haas Lake, at the north end of Wilds Ridge. The applicatio . ncludes the D lowing requests: of 63 lots for single family dwellings on 51 gross acres. The development ublic streets and parkland. ., The proposed PUD amendme and preliminary pia , e generally consistent with the provisions of the Zoning an ubdivision Ordinances.' e staff recommended approval, subject to the following c ditions: . Approve an amendment to The . Approve a Preliminary Plat. 1. Demonstrate how ewer service to this plat can be provide 2. Identify the use d ultimate ownership of the outlots. 3. Provide net I areas for Lots 10-12, Block 2. The area of these 12,000 squ e feet above any ponding or wetlands. 4. Dedicate utlot C as Park on the final plat. 5. Obtain permit from the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District pn gradi g on the site. L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMIS\04pc Minutes\MN041204.doc 11 i _ _/_ -f 1',~ r1 fl, -12 I j- .-.~,? .Ii I .l I '. I . ".I! I / "~' ;'- I' I~ :r / .:.. .'t, III I "' I ',. '.'.'- 1 I I!, I "", . . I / '.. ;'-. ~,_:.' ' .01- . Jk /1 /;~: / / :/" / / ).../ I ,',' X / ::~::r ;. Ii"'/. ' / r'o 1 / :tj> \, ~/ ' ~ ~ z 'I: ~ i a IS 7-:d 1.5 . - \1 !~ I! i g ~ I I~ i 1 \.'g e i __.__J 0 ~ i , - ,__ __ - I.. II . :_~___~~.~~ u 1 , " 'i J ~, t U'J,-~ -, :>~; J\ C!i W\'l~\ ~ t:C !~I N i(~'J)\ !Ii :,"" ~ ~. ;..:::~:J ,'G n ~:C~ II - ',~\ -- .:' ~ \...1 t",:t' :::\ \ .1 ~:~I t:~..' f.. ,/ /, .,f \ :=~ E~[e C'teek ~ <])f)1b~ March 12,2004 City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 To Whom It May Concern: F-'" < --------...... .~;;.,: -~~.2 ~I~. .'5304 "1 ! [' uL-._ ,s: ~_._--=-j Weare requesting a zoning change in the Deerfield Industrial Park from C- 5 to I -1. We have been marketing. the industrial park for over a year and to date there are current! y 4-5 businesses interested in the 1-1 zoning. Also, to date there is only one business that we know of that is interested in C-5 zoning. This information has been compiled from information obtained from the city as well as potential clients that have contacted us. Therefore, we feel a need for this zoning change. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (952) 447-5058. 7765 East 175th Street · Prior Lake, MN 55372 · Phone 952-447-5058 · Fax 95~-447-5036 "E -8 .5 j f.: ~ ~ ~~ jj!l : 2"~l. ~ ClI Gi !!g!I!I:~~ ~ .. J! i! ~ ~ ~ 0 F-8e -e .! "0 ."O~ tSe!!- ll!!clill!~""etS . OE!~~~lI~ 1.- .2:-~~8 ~ll~tS!.. i I t l:ClIafi~~.. ClI!~R ~ ClI i~ 0.: ,!B-el8e"2o.!!!l 'Ii 8S! !lcD~'" ccl!!ClI~ ~.l!! .!!~t5Ui ~~ClI Igt~~lll.~ .1 .!!!beao.ClI "O.!!'~c,g 1t5-1 ~18 ~~i~i ~ I- €ii=oi~ .... c: G) E -c c: 0) i:E cu<( a.C: co .~ 0: ....0) tntn :::J::> "C c:-c -c: "Cco Ci)-I ceO) $.~ oC: 0) ..c: CD L- a. E o () III ~ 1'-- ~ ... " o a "C t) ~ CL c ~ o~ ~ G e~ ~~] ,c.,:c ~L .c z. IIIZ Zj IL LIII .. 0:) ua RZ oj N m~ 0)0 '-(\1 m~ .cco ~2 ~-2 ZLL ooi:; is -co 8'-0 -00. <(:J ... Q. Cii<<! tiC Q)~ .0' 0. ...0. g,E ~~ -c Cco c_ ~D.. D..o. ~E XO o U) fir i 8 6 ~ ~l ~ ~ ! :; :;,~ Ii (I) "!:!,r c c 'i!;! 'i ~:88 Ii s. fldil1ii~~U i Ot~cx8j :;'~J!IJ! ~ : ~ ~ ~ ! !E j ~ i I 0 ~ 1..1.: ::) 10: o~.i! o~ x-m ll:~: 1 o~~~~~~~~i~~.~ ~fo:o:o:.~oooolo _ j II Illjllill 1! ~ f 2 ~ E ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ I t.lli~lt~ ~.., .. ".1' il!,~t.l~ fUlhJ'~ l!i.!lf!1 illtjSl4:t .... -I i'ii !Jll~ Itr-J ~)'tII~ cJ~; i!ljJUh ~1 i ]1~lf ~'i -8: ... c: CD ~~ coC: c..CD _E .~ <( ...c::: U)CO ::J- -cQ. .ECD -c .~ -U) ~~ <DoC CD CD Oa. E o CJ III I z.~ II. ~ C 2 " z - z 2 .. m S"2 ~ D: ~ cs C N O~ a- u Iii ii i 'E J2 ~ Iii J I ~1~1~ "Ill ~"-r!O:: ~~ U) -iiill~~o::O"!j ~ ~ 0:: E ~ . ~ m ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ E . 'tiS ~~i~E..85 (5 "gi!~ ~.ij~~ii. I ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ I ! g ::::> .! I ~ I ~.!jQ.~ "2 i ~;i~>- !I~ ~ "ail,;~ ~ ~ f c% '" IU '" ~ t-.!! ~ 10 i.~~~ 9 <(~;t~~;fu33~u"iif!l(J) (J) Q. I IIIIIIIIIDII~~ . ~; ~~ .... .2 c:: co ii: X Prior Loke Development Potentiol Downtown Prior lake is one of Ihe target areas for physical and economic I9development. A market study, targeting potential commercial, resi- dential, retail and business park development in Prior Lake from 2005-2025, was completed by the McComb Group LTD in January 2004. The purpose of the study was three-fold: 1 . Determine potential acreages for commer- cial / industrial devel- opment and high- density residential de- velopment. 2. Predict the timing and magnitude of develop- ment for specific land uses. Make recommendations in a general manner, as to the most appropriate loca- tion(s) for the various types of developments. The complete study consists of over 50 pages of maps, charts and accumulated data. This report is intended to summarize the data, and highlight the findings of the report. A copy of the full report is available on-line at www.cityofpriorlake.com by clicking the "Document Center" link, and opening the "McCombs Study" folder. For further information on de- velopment in Prior lake, con- tad Community Development Director John Sullivan by tele- phone at 952.447.9805, or by email at isullivan@cityofpriorlake.com. Multi-Family - There is an anticipated demand of 1 200 additional units by 2025 which trans- lates to an additional 50 to 60 acres. The City's existing 2020 Comp Plan designates 636 acres for multi-family. The new plan will de- crease the multi-family designation by 580 acres. Commercial- Uses (including retail, services, health care, etc.) are anticipated to triple be- tween 2005 and 2025 from approximately 300,000 sq. ft. today to 900,000 sq. ft. by 2025. This wiUmean the addition of 62 acres of commer- cial usage Oty-wide. Business Park - At present, the City has approximately 200,000 sq. ft. of business park uses (office, warehouse, showroom, manufac- turing, etc.). By 2025, there will be an increase to 2miUion sq. ft. which will require an additional 135 to 1 85 additional acres for development. Prior Lake Development Potential 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 Ph. 952.447.4230 www.cityofpriorlake.c:om John Sullivan, Community Development Director The population within the trade area is younger than the Minnespolis / St. Paul metro area with those under 17 years of age making up 29% of the population, and those over 65 year old mak- ing up 4.80/0. This compares to the MSP area at 24.5% and 9.7010 respectively. From a household income perspective, the trade area has an average of $97,304 which is expected to increase to $112,025 by 2007. This average household income is 34% higher than the average for the Metro area at $71,000. By 2007, over 18% of the households in the Prior lake trade area will have an income of greater than $150,000, and 43.3% will have an income over $100,000. Those areas presently designated as multi-family in the 2020 Comp Plan which exceed projected needs are most likely to be designated low or medium density residential. The additional 62 acres to be developed as commercial are most likely to be concentrated in the three existing nodes including: Downtown Prior lake, Gateway, and Priordale. The additional 135-1 85 acres of business park are most likely to be located in the Deer- field Business Park (30 acres), the Vierling property (40 acres) at CSAH 21 and CSAH 42, and the remainder north of CSAH 42 just west of Crest Avenue. .......jq. ft_op:peGr'" > > >>>',fft.~..ih,37._ ',. ... ~2025. 11testvdy ~the tUft. bet,of..... feet_mar.. k. COIl."'''' 2005 and kt.2025.." .....tmICOte . . . u. .. ......01.......... . 50 . .'. . . ... ..'20~.' .... . ......,devOted to.... use, '.. . ... . . . ....... .' '" ...... .. . .: fn2004~.. .........r.-r- WI,tIkt. . ..... '.' ............. __............. . wwm _be ' ..'....... --TIl11fmM- · 'y 200S, a such.,..... . ..' t20pot supermarket of25pQO sq. ft... be .~ by s....feet CCIR be ab- 2025. . aorbedwhich gtoWS to 6$;000 sq. ft. by 2025. ........ -" 2005, be..........5. . . 12pGO sq. ft. for liquor $OIessq. ft. If.' 202$. is pro~ with. 2025 SGlUi'aIlOn .. 33;000 sq;. ft. ~'~,ffull""""i ~deiI) . . sq." "'~'for 2005, while ~$O. tq.ft.... pro- ~ti7 aGU. ''''w fllJ '. . .1'.000_ ft.1R2OO$~ 4MOosq~fLln 2025.. . For Marl /"lorll'uIIOIl "" Ii!, Sludv III< Ord( rly A filiI x(1lroll Aqft f 1')('/11 or lIlt IllClflV t xClllflq (('II'lIlt rCICl! <lflc! EcO'IOflllC D. "f'f"p'll' III OpporlUlIl11( 1.1 Pr or Ilk, o'llcnl C,VI'I"l!IIII~ Df v( fopllll III D'r. ~Ior J,)/III SUI/I.-CT'1 alld l(l~. ,J(J.-rl'lldO' "~I ...flol Pilar LC1~' kJ t,) oil. r'