HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/28/2002REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002
Fire Station - City Council Chambers
6:30 p.m.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Call Meeting to Order:
Roll Call:
Approval of Minutes:
Consent Agenda: None
Publii: Hearings:
Case #02-064: Shamrock Development is requesting approval of a Preliminary
Plat known as The Wilds North, consisting of 77.26 acres to be subdivided into 68
lots for single family dwellings and 4 outlots for future development in the
southeast quadrant of the intersection of CSAH's 42 and 83, north of Wilds
Parkway.
Case #02-065: Shamrock Development is requesting a Conditional Use Permit of
approximately 15 acres of land located on the east side of CSAH 83, south of
CSAH 42 to allow grading before approval of the preliminary plat known as The
Wilds North.
Case #02-059 and #02-060: Wensmarm Homes is requesting approval of a
Preliminary Planned Unit Development Plan and Preliminary Plat of a mixed
development consisting of 22 single family homes, 31 attached townhouse units
and 28 attached condominium uses on 34.5 acres. This property is located on the
west side of CSAH 21 and north of CSAH 82.
6. Old Business:
Case #02-047: Wensmann Realty is requesting a Final Planned Unit
Development Plan and Final Plat for the development of 64 townhouse units on
7.17 net acres, and a Final Plat consisting of 23.66 acres to be subdivided into 2
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
lots for commercial development and 67 lots for townhouses and common open
space.
7. New Business:
A. Case #02-049: Wensmann Homes is requesting a Vacation of the existing
drainage and utility easements located on Lots 21-23, Block 2, Wensmarm 1s~
Addition.
8. Announcements and Correspondence:
9. Adjournment:
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002
1. Call to Order:
Chairman Stamson called the May 13, 2002, Planning Co .mmission meeting to order at
6:31 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Criego, Lemke, Ringstad and
Stamson, Community Development Director Don Rye, Planning Coordinator Jane
Kansier and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson.
2. Roll Call:
Atwood Present
Criego Present
Lemke Present
Ringstad Present
Stamson Present
3. Approval of Minutes:
The Minutes from the April 22, 2002, Planning Commission meeting were approved as
presented.
4. Consent:
A. Case #02-029 Steve Mosey Variance Resolution.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated May 13, 2002,
on file in the office of the City Planning Department.
The Resolution is consistent with the Planning Commission's direction for the denial of 9
variances for the construction of an entryway, garage and room addition to an existing
single family dwelling. On April 29, 2002, the applicant submitted to staffa letter dated
4/27/02 as notice of appeal to the City Council of the Planning Commission's decision to
deny the above described variances as requested by the applicant. The appeal is
scheduled for hearing before the City Council on May 20, 2002.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 02-
005PC DENTYING A 24-FOOT VARIANCE TO PERlVI1T A 1-FOOT FRONT SETBACK; A
3.58-FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMlrr A SUM OF SIDE YARDS OF 11.42-FEET; 5.9-FOOT
VARIANCE TO BUILDING SEPARATION OF 9.I-FEET; A 4.7-FOOT AND 5-FOOT
VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN EAVE/GUTTER ENCROACHMENT IN FRONT AND SIDE
LOT LINES; A 6-FOOT AND 2.18-FOOT VARIANCE FOR BUILDING WALLS OVER 50-
FEET LONG; A 3.7-FOOT AND 4-FOOT VARIANCES TO PER_MIT A DRIVEWAY WIDTH
AND SETBACK TO A FRONT AND SIDE LOT LINES.
Vote taken indicated ayes by Criego, Atwood and Stamson. Nays by Ringstad and
Lemke. MOTION CARRIED.
L:~2FILFaS ~2planning ¢omm~02peminuteakIvlN051302.do~ 1
Planning Cotnmission Meeting
May 13, 2002
5. Public Hearings:
Commissioner Stamson read the public hearing statement.
A. Case #02-026: Bluff Heights Apartments is requesting a Conditional Use
Permit to develop a 49-unit apartment building on 3.62 acres of vacant land located
on the north side of Franklin Trail, east of Highway 13 and west of Bluff Heights
Trail.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated May 13, 2002,
on file in the office of the City Planning Department.
BluffHeights Apartments, Limited Partnership, represented by Gregory McClenahan, has
filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a multifamily dwelling
on the property located on the north side of Franklin Trail, east of TH 13 and west of
Bluff Heights Trail. The plan proposes 49 units on a total of 3.62 acres. The property is
zoned R-4 (High Density Residential) and is guided as R-HD (Urban High Density) on
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. Multi-family dwellings require a CLIP within
the R-4 Zoning District.
Staff recommended the Planning Commission continue this matter and direct the
developer to provide the necessary additional information. In order to allow the
developer time to submit this information, and the staffthe time to review it, the item
should be continued to June 10, 2002.
Atwood questioned buffer yards. Kansier explained the differences between B & C
bufferyards and briefly explained screening requirements.
Criego questioned the allocation for parks or playgrounds. Kansier said the land is not
being platted and therefore not required. The applicant does show a small playground
and a trail around the pond.
Comments from the public:
Applicant Greg McClenahan, representing Bluff Heights Apartments, said he does not
have any problems with continuing the matter to June 10, as they are working on staffs
conditions. The City Engineer is reviewing the storm water plans. The plan was to
satisfy the 60% exterior materials requirements. McClenahan explained they were
looking into a part stucco and brick building material, landscaping and bufferyard,
lighting, garage setback and park requirements.
Criego questioned if there was adequate space for children in the development.
McClenahan said it was similar to other projects he has built in Scott County. He felt the
project was family oriented with a demographic of 1.9 children per household. There
L:\02FILES\02planning comm\02pcminutesXMN051302.doc 2
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
would be a game room, tot lot, pedestrian path and picnic shelter on the property. He felt
they have done a fair job in addressing the recreation area for children.
Irene Mangan, 4810 Bluff Heights Trail, stated her major concem is the population of the
building. Another concern is the drainage nmoff.' The area already has several existing
wet areas. She questioned who will take responsibility for the problems. Mangan
pointed out the drainage fiom this project running into their parking lot. Safety is an
issue with the busy comer and heavy traffic.
Walter Hriber, 4818 Franklin Trail, said a big issue is the existing water problems. The
project needs to be tiled. Another concern is to have the developer install a fence to keep
the kids fi.om Intoning into their propemj.
Greg McClenahan said they did hold an informational meeting and discussed putting up a
fence along the boundaries and they would be more than willing to do so. He also
addressed the neighbor's drainage concerns.
The hearing was closed at 7:00 p.m.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Criego questioned Kansier on the existing water problems on the adjacent parcel.
Kansier explained the City is concerned with mnoffproblems.
Ringstad said the drainage concerns are legitimate. The engineering department can
address this issue at the next meeting.
MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO CONTINLrE THE MATTER
TO JUNE 10, 2002.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
B. Case #02-045: Shamrock Development is requesting.an Amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan to change the designation from Community Retail Shopping
(C-CC) to Residential - High Density (RHD) for the vacant land located on the west
side of CSAH 83, south of CSAH 42 and north of The Wilds.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated May 13, 2002,
on file in the office of the City Plarming Department.
Shamrock Development has filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
for the property located on the south side of CSAH 42, east of CSAH 83 and north of The
Wilds. The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map fiom the
current C-CC (Community Retail Shopping) designation to the R-ltD (High Density
Residential) designation on approximately 20 acres of vacant land.
L:~02FILES~2planning cora~n~2pcrninut~s~MN051302.doc 3
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
This property is presently zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and C-4 (General
Business) and is designated as C-CC (Community Retail Shopping) on the 2020
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. At this time, the applicant is planning to develop
this entire 70 acre property to the east and the west of this site. The proposed
development would include single family lots to the east, commercial lots to the west,
and a townhouse style development on the area in question.
Staff recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan as requested.
Comments from the public:
Nick Polta, Engineer for Pioneer Engineering represented Shamrock, presented the
preliminary development plan. The idea was to get the land use changed to know how to
proceed in platting future development. Criego questioned what plans for high density.
Polta responded maybe a variety of mix.
The public hearing was closed at 7:11 p.m.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Criego:
· This use is appropriate for the property. It should be changed to High Density.
· Recommended the City look at other areas for commercial property.
Lemke:
· Agreed with Criego, it is a good use of the property.
Atwood:
· Questioned the difference between neighborhood retail and community retail.
Kansier explained the uses and limitations.
· Concerned community retail is on the outside perimeters of County Roads 42 and 83
with the surrounding residential area.
· Stamson said the remaining strip of property would be a buffer between the districts.
Ringstad:
· Agreed, this change makes sense.
Stamson:
· Concurred with the Commissioners. Looking at the applicant's diagram, they took
into account they would be able to develop commercially under the balance of the
property.
· Supported request.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL
OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE R-I-ID DESIGNATION.
L:~02FILES\02planmng comm~O2pcminutas~vIN051302.do¢ 4
Planning Commission Meeting
May 1.~, 2002
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
This item will go before the City Council on June 3, 2002.
C. Case #02-044: Shamrock Development is requesting to amend the Zoning
Ordinance to reclassify Hass Lake as a Recreational Development Lake and to
rezone the adjacent 20 acres from the A (Agriculture) District to the R-1 (Low
Density Residential) District.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated May 13, 2002,
on file in the office of the City Planning Department.
Shamrock Development and Wesley Langhoff have filed an application for a Zone
Change for the property (20.04 acres) located on the south side of CSAH 42,
approximately V~ mile east of CSAH 83 and directly west of Hass Lake. The request is to
rezone the property from the A (Agricultural) District to the R-1 (Low Density
Residential) District, and to change the designation of Hass Lake from a Natural
Environment Lake to a Recreational Development Lake.
The DNR has met with the developer and the staffto discuss the proposed
reclassification. In his letter dated April 2002, Pat Lynch, Area Hydrologist, is generally
supportive of this reclassification, based on the undemtanding the area directly adjacent
to the lake will be preserved and be dedicated to the City. This dedication would be
accomplished at the time of platting.
The Planning staff recommended approval of the Zone Change and the reclassification of
Haas Lake as proposed. Staff finds the proposed R-1 district consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan designation. The proposed classification of Hass Lake to a
recreational development lake is also justified based on the existing development
surrounding the lake, the availability of public sewer and water services, and the abutting
major arterial roadway.
Atwood questioned the classification of the lake by today's regulations. Kansier
responded it would most likely be classified as a recreational lake.
Comments from the public:
Nick Polta of Pioneer Engineering represented the applicant, pointed out one of the
recommendations from Pat Lynch, Area Hydrologist from the DNR, was the separation
of lots on the lake. The developer designed the plan around their (DNR's) concerns.
Tom Chaklos, 3161 140th Street, Shakopee, stated he owns the majority of land around
Hass Lake. He said it bothered him the City wants to make this change and never even
talk to the people who own the property. Chaklos said his property was changed from
Agriculture to Lakeshore Development according to Scott County, because that is what is
in their plat book. Now Prior Lake is going to change the lake designation and not even
L:X02FILES\02plannins comm\02pcminutes~MN051302.doc 5
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
consult with the property owners. Although he is for the change, he felt the Planning
Commission should have the input from the people affected by it. Stamson explained
that was why the City holds public hearings. Chaklos said he did receive a Notice but
felt he should have some input without a public hearing. He felt The Wilds has been
screwed up twice with City ordinances. Problems with the past City Council destroyed
the original plan. The new City Council should be aware of the problems. Chaklos is for
the change only because it will increase the value of his property. His land is still zoned
Agriculture. Chaklos has talked to the developer and has received more information from
him than the City. When the City misuses the ordinance the residents pay the price. If
this lake is changed to a recreational lake it is open to the public. Do people have access
to use his property to get to the lake?
Stamson responded the change of the designation does not affect the surrounding land in
such a way that anyone would have access. It would not change the use of the lake. It is
recognition from the DNR for what types of uses surrounding the lake can be used for.
Chaklos said a boat was in the lake and the only way to it was through his property or
The Wilds. He owns almost 40 acres.
Criego asked Chaklos to point out his property boundaries. Choklas responded. He is in
favor of the applicant's request.
The hearing was closed at 7:30 p.m.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Lemke:
· Agreed with staff and supported both requests.
Atwood:
· Questioned the allowances for natural versus recreational lake uses. Kansier said
there is really no change. A public access would be determined as part of the plat.
There would be limited access. The lake is not that big and will probably not
accommodate boats. Maybe a dock to fish could be put in.
· Questioned the boundaries. Kansier pointed out the boundaries.
· Supported staff's recommendations.
Ringstad:
· Supported both requests. The designation of the natural environment lake was done
several years ago and clearly the community has changed since that designation.
· The property is surrounded by R1 property and it makes sense to change.
Criego:
· Agreed with Ringstad.
· Recommend the applicant pay particular attention to the DNR's recommendations to
protect the bluff as well as the trees.
L:\02FILES\02planning comm\02pcminutesWiN051302.doc 6
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
Stamson:
· Agreed with Commissioners and supported both requests.
· It is important to keep in mind in changing the designation of the lake does not
change the use of the lake. The surrounding use of the land is effected.
· The lake designation has changed over the years.
· The change to R-1 is appropriate.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST TO THE R-1 DISTRICT ON 20.04 ACRES.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE RECLASSIFYING HASS
LAKE TO A RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LAKE.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
This matter will go before the City Council on June 3, 2002.
D. Cases #02-055 01ezoning); #02-038 (PUD Amendment); #02-039
(Preliminary Plat); and 02-048 (Vacation) Wensmann Homes have submitted
applications for an amendment to the Wensmann 1~t Addition PUD Plan and a
preliminary plat. This proposal adds 0.53 acres of. the Kuper property, located along
the east side of Wensmann 2"a Addition, to the existing PUD. The plan extends the
private street and adds 4 townhouse units to the PUD plan. The vacation application
is to vacate the existing drainage and utility easement over Lot 39.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated May 13, 2002,
on file in the office of the City Planning Department.
Wensmann Realty, Inc., has applied for approval of a development to be known as
Wensmann 3~ Addition on the property located north of CSAH 82, west of Fox Tail Trail
and Wensmarm 2"d Addition. The application includes the following requests:
· A rezoning of approximately 0.53 acres from the R-1 (Low Density Residential)
district to the R-2 (Low to Medium Density Residential) district;
· An amendment to the Wensmarm 1st Addition Planned Unit Development Plan;
· A Preliminary Plat;
· The vacation of the existing drainage and utility easement over Lot 39, Block 1,
Wensmann 2na Addition.
The proposal adds 0.53 acres to the east side of the existing PUD, extends the private
streets and adds 4 townhouse units to the existing development.
L:\02F1LES~02planning ¢omm~02pcminuteshMN051302.doc 7
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
The proposed rezoning, PUD amendment, preliminary plat and vacation are consistent
with the existing development of Wensmarm 1s~. The staff therefore recommends
approval, subject to the following conditions:
1. The resolution vacating the easement will not be recorded until the final plat of
Wensmarm 3rd has been approved and signed by the City.
2. Provide an irrigation plan for the new area.
3. Address the following Engineering issues in the final plat plans:
a. For all watermains the depth of cover shall be a minimum of 8' to top of pipe and
maximum of 10' of cover. Also 10' of horizontal separation shall be provided
from other parallel utility alignments.
b. Note to provide a minimum of 18" vertical separation for all waterrnain crossings
with sanitary sewer.
c. Check the sanitary service invert elevations for Lots 3 and 4. Does the
documented building elevation justify the sanitary service invert elevation depth
being greater than 10' for Lot 17
d. Minimum grade for sanitary service stubs shall be ¼" per foot (2%).
e. Delete or verify curb & gutter detail on page 4 meet the requirements of City of
Prior Lake Public Works Design Manual Plate # 507 on page 8.
f. Signature of company responsible for erosion and sediment control plan
preparation, implementation and maintenance.
g. Extend existing 2'contour lines a minimum of 200' beyond the property boundary
to accurately depict the existing drainage patterns.
h. Note for all silt fence to be installed by the contractor and inspected by the City
prior to any site work.
i. Delete or verify silt fence detail on page 5 meet the requirements of City of Prior
Lake Public Works Design Manual Plate # 602 on page 8.
j. Slopes greater than or equal to 4:1 shall have erosion control blanket installed
immediately after finished grading.
k. Organize plan sheets in the following order: Title sheet, Detail sheets, Grading &
Erosion Plan, Sanitary Sewer & Watermain sheets, Street sheets
1. Existing utilities shall be shown and labeled as existing.
m. All streets shall be clearly labeled.
n. Bench marks shall be placed on ali sheets.
o. Title Block shall include horizontal and vertical scales, and City project number.
p. Verify Location Map and Overall Plan specific requirements on Title sheet.
q. The street construction plans shall show the centerline curve data.
L:\02FILES\02plannin g comm\02pcminutesWiN051302,doc 8
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
Comments from the public:
Kelly Murray, representing Wensmann Realty, explained the original plan of Wensmann
1st Addition overlooking the access on this piece of property. It is a nice fit for both the
seller and developer that this could be worked out.
Kyle Schroeder, 15557 Highland Avenue, questioned the Comprehensive Plan for traffic
on County Road 82 as it relates to safety, access and noise; questioned the impervious
surface requirements and drainage impact on the wetland. Schroeder suggested more
consideration for traffic on County Road 82 for further developments.
Kansier responded the access points are dictated by Scott County based on spacing
requirements. The County Road will be upgraded. The City has requested that the road
be included in their Capital Improvement Plan.
Rye said the City Council is concerned with the traffic problems on County Road 82.
The City's understanding is that ultimately the road will become a 4-lane. The City does
not have control of the timing of the upgrade.
Kansier said the impervious surface and drainage meet the requirements as well as the
Watershed District's requirements.
Schroeder said he was concerned for the existing developments. There has to be a
Comprehensive Plan addressing the additional traffic. The City and County have to
partner on these issues.
Kansier said the County has a plan for the road. The City does partner with the County on
utilities, trails and bike paths. The City Council is concerned about the traffic issue and is
in contact with Scott County.
The Commissioners had a brief discussion on the development process.
The public hearing closed at 7:53 p.m.
Comments from the CommissiOners:
Ringstad:
Thanked Mr. Schroeder for his concerns regarding County Road 82.
Based on the information - approve all four requests.
Criego:
· Questioned a connection between Regal Crest and this development. Kansier replied
it would not connect with this project. The adjoining property will eventually
connect.
· Kelly Murray explained the sanitary sewer easement and the connection.
· .Agreed with staff's recommendation.
L:\02FILES~02planning corrma~2pcminutesWiN051302.doc 9
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
Lemke:
· Agreed with staffs recommendation, it is a good use for a half acre that would
otherwise become an unattractive nuisance.
Atwood:
· Support all requests.
Stamson:
· Agreed with staff and Commissioners, it is an appropriate use of the land.
· Questioned if the City already has a Wilderness Trail. Kansier said the road will not
be called Wilderness Trail. The development is call Wilderness Ridge.
MOTION BY RINGSTAD SECOND BY ATWOOD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF REZONING 0.53 ACRES FROM THE R-1 DISTRICT TO THE R-2 DISTRICT.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECOND BY ATWOOD, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE WENSMANN 1sT PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT TO STAFF'S CONDITIONS.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL
OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS WENSMANN'S 3P'°
ADDITION, SUBJECT TO STAFF'S CONDITIONS.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL
OF THE VACATION DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT OVER LOT 39,
BLOCK 1, WENSMANN 2ND ADDITION, SUBJECT TO STAFF'S CONDITIONS.
Vote taken indicated ayes by ali. MOTION CARRIED.
This matter will go before the City Council on June 3, 2002.
A recess was called at 7:59 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:06 p.m.
6. Old Business:
A. Case File #02-013 (continued) Tom Holme Construction, Inc. is requesting
consideration of a preliminary plat named Red Cedar Heights consisting of 4.34
acres to be subdivided into 7 lots for single family residential development. The
L:\02FILES\02planning comm~02pcminutes~MN05t 302.doc l 0
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
property is located on the northeast side of Mushtown Road, west of Toronto
Avenue and Overlook Drive.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated May 13, 2002,
on file in the office of the City Planning Department.
Tom Holme Construction, Inc. has applied for a preliminary plat for the property located
on the north side of Mushtown Road, directly west of Toronto Avenue and Overlook
Drive. The preliminary plat consists of 4.34 acres to be subdivided into 7 lots for single
family residential development.
The Plarming Commission considered this item at a public hearing on April 22, 2002.
The major issue pertaining to the plat is the storm water runoff management ponds. The
Engineering Department has reviewed the storm water runoffplan and has determined
the second pond, located on the north end of Lots 3 and 4 may be acceptable, but is not
the most desirable plan. It was noted that the staff and the developer are reviewing other
options to manage some of this runoff. This solution would not be available before City
Council review of the preliminary plat, so the developer agreed to a condition that would
not allow a grading permit on the site until final plat approval. Other potential options
would not substantially affect the other design parameters of this plat.
The Commissioners felt the runoff issues should be addressed and the matter should be
open for the neighbors to review the plans. The Commission therefore tabled action on
this matter until May 13, 2002.
The staff recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat subject to the following
conditions:
1. There will be no grading permit issued until the final plat has been approved by the
City Council.
2. Identify the required buffer strip around the delineated wetland and the required 30~
setback from the 100-year flood elevation of the wetlands and ponds on the grading
plan.
3. Revise the tree inventory to identify the caliper inches of the significant trees.
Provide the calculations indicating the number of caliper inches to be removed for
development of roads, utilities and drainageways, and the number of caliper inches to
be removed for building pads and driveways.
4. Raise the garage floor elevations where possible at least 1' above the curb elevations
to provide positive drainage away from the house.
5. All improvements, includ'mg utilities, roads, storm water ponds and so on, must be
constructed in conformance with the Public Works Design Manual. All plans must
also be prepared in conformance with the Public Works Design Manual.
Commissioner Stamson reopened the public hearing.
L:~02F1LES~02planning gomm\02pcminutcshMN051302.doc I 1
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
Comments from the public:
Jennifer McCollough, 17294 Toronto Avenue SE, suggested re-routing the driveway to
Mushtown Road. McCollough explained drainage problems she had with her property.
She was also concerned with the long driveway and felt it would cause additional pooling
and stagnant water. McCollough pointed out there were 18 driveways on the surrounding
Mushtown Road and did not feel adding one more driveway would be a safety issue.
Requested the City require installation of a pipe under her driveway and leave the area
open and natural.
Ringstad questioned McCollough if the additional pipe would give her comfort with her
concerns with drainage problems. She responded she would like that.
Jim Johnson with Hakanson Anderson, represented the developers in the project.
Johnson addressed the drainage concem by Ms. McCollough on the proposed
development. It is necessary to get the water drained to the wetlands. He felt through the
grading plans this issue will be addressed. There will be natural buffering along
Mushtown Road and would like to see the driveway come out on Overlook Drive. The
Watershed District requirements have been met. Johnson explained the problems with
the access to the wetland. The plans were not sent to the City until Friday and therefore
the staff did not receive them for review until today. He felt the issues had been
addressed.
Criego asked Johnson to explain the drainage on the southeast portion of the property.
Johnson responded the culvert running under the driveway to Overlook Drive goes into
the wetland area. The 12" pipe will meet the requirements for the water to get to the
wetland.
Jennifer McCollough questioned Johnson's explanation on drainage. Johnson pointed
out the driveway is going to be minimum width, probably 10 to 12 feet wide.
The public hearing was closed at 8:28 p.m.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Lemke:
· Agreed to move ahead. Staff is comfortable moving forward with the drainage issue.
· Understands the neighbor's concern for the driveway. Putting another driveway on
Mushtown Road just because there are 18 existing driveways does not make sense.
Atwood:
· Felt the driveway is excessive but agreed with staff when they say they want to limit
the access on Mushtown Road.
· Appreciated the homeowner's feelings.
· The 12" culvert sounds adequate. The City will hold the developer true to that.
· Move forward on with staff's recommendation.
L:\02FI LES\02planning comm\02pcmin utes~vlN051302.doc 12
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
Ringstad:
· Agreed to move along.
· The neighbor's drainage concern will be resolved.
Criego:
· One of the reasons the Commission held tiffs over was to assure the neighbor the
drainage was taken care of.
· Feel uncomfortable to move this forward. The City Engineer has not had time to
review this.
· All we are loosing is a couple of weeks for the neighbor's comfort.
· Felt the matter should be tabled.
Stamson:
· Regarding the driveway - there are problems both ways. It would be more of a
problem having the driveway come offMushtown Road. This provides a permanent
solution to the problem. It is a better design.
· Support that part of the draining plan.
· Understand Criego's concern but comfortable moving forward. Staff did not feel
there was any problem at the first meeting. There are no major problems effected by
the drainage.
· This will also be reviewed at the City Council level before a grading issue is granted.
· Move forward.
Open discussion:
· Lemke said now that the plat has been redesigned there should not be a problem and
was comfortable moving forward.
· Atwood heard two things fi.om the neighbor, the drainage and appearance.
Appreciate her concerns, but staff has legitimate access to Mushtown Road.
MOTION BY RINGSTAND, SECOND BY LEMKE, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS RED CEDAR HEIGHTS,
SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
Vote taken indicated ayes by Ringstad, Lemke, Atwood and Stamson. Nay by Criego.
MOTION CAKRIED.
This item will go before the City Council on June 3, 2002.
7. New Business:
A. Case #02-043: The City of Prior Lake is requesting to vacate a drainage and
utility easement on part of Lot 1, Block 2, Waterfront Passage Addition.
L:\02FILES~02planning comm~02pcminutesWIN051302.doc 13
Planning Commission Meeting
May 13, 2002
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated May 13, 2002,
on file in the office of the City Planning Department.
The City of Prior Lake has filed an application to vacate a portion of the drainage and
utility easement located on Lot 1, Block 2, Waterfront Passage Addition. This property is
located on the southwest side of Cottonwood Lane, east ofFish Point Road and west of
AdelmaIm Street. The easement originally covered a wetland area that has since been
filled. Vacating the easement will facilitate construction of the Norex office building on
this site.
Staff recommended approval of the request. Once this portion of wetland was filled, the
need for a drainage and utility easement ceased to exist.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Ali Commissioners supported staff's report.
MOTION BY LEMKE, SECOND BY ATWOOD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF THE PROPOSED VACATION OF THE EASEMENT.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
This matter will go before the City Council on May 20, 2002.
8. Announcements and Correspondence:
Atwood commented it was nice to see the Norex building in the business office park.
Rye said Norex was happy to build and stay in Prior Lake.
Lemke questioned an informational sign off Franklin Trail. Kansier explained the signs
on new developments.
2c~th
Criego questioned a tour of the City. Kansier said it is still planned for July ~ .
Criego mentioned the Planning Commission had talked about further discussions on
separating R-1 and Medium density. Rye said the City was prepared to go ahead with the
discussions but the Long Range Committee was formed and it was decided to hold off
and see what transpires from that. There may be other things in the Comprehensive Plan
to look at. It will be reviewed at the same time.
9. Adjournment:
The meeting adjourned at 8:40 pm.
Don Rye
Community Development Director
Connie Carlson
Recording Secretary
L:\02 FILES\02planning comm\02pcminutes\MN051302.doc 14
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
5A
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR
A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS THE
WILDS NORTH
JANE KANSHHL PLANNING COORDINATOR
X YES NO-N/A
MAY 28, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
Shamrock Development has applied for a Preliminary Plat for the property located on the
north side of CSAH 82, on the south side of W'flds Parkway and west of Orion Road, The
preliminary plat consists of 77.19 acres to be subdivided into 140 lots for single family
residential development. The plat also includes a 6.6 acre park and a 1.17 acre lot for the
City booster station and well house.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Total Site Area: The total site area consists of 77.62 acres.
Topograohv: This site has a varied terrain with elevations ranging from 907' MSL along
Hass Lake to 1000' MSL at the southwest comer of the site. The east side of the
property, adjacem to Hass Lake, is considered a bluff under the Shoreland Ordinance.
Vegetation: This site has historically been cropland. The eastern potion of the site
includes several significant trees. Development on this site is subject to the Tree
Preservation requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
Wetlands: There are three wetlands on the site. Wetland 1 is located at the northwest
corner of the site, Wetland 2 is located in the center of the site, and Wetland 3 is located
on east side of the site. Wetland 3 is actually Hass Lake. The plans do not indicate any
disturbance of the wetlands.
Access: Access to the site will be from CSAH 83 and from CSAH 42.
Zoning and Land Use Plan Desienation of Adiacent Property: The property to the
north, across CSAH 42, is zoned R-1 and is designated for R-I-ID uses on the 2020
16200 13~l~o~~;.?l~htil~,~,i)~Ol~af~2-1714 / Ph. (952)447-4230 / Fax (952)447-4245 Pa~l
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Comprehensive Plan. The property to the east is zoned A, and is designated for R-L/MD
uses. The property to the west and the south is zoned R-I and PUD, and is designated for
R-L/MD uses.
PROPOSED PLAN
2020 Comprehensive Plan Designation: This property is designated for R-L/MD uses
and C-CC uses on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The developer recently
submitted an application for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would
redesignate a portion of this site (Outlot D) for R-I-ID uses. The City Council will
consider this amendment on June 3, 20021
Zoning: The property is currently zoned A, R-l, and C-2. The applicant has submitted
an application for a zone change from the A district to the R-I district, which will be
considered by the City Council on June 3, 2002.
Shoreland District: The eastern portion of this property is located within the Hass Lake
Shoreland District. Hass Lake is presently classified as a Natural Environment Lake. On
June 3, 2002, the City Council will consider a request to reclassify the lake as a
Recreational Development Lake. The proposed reclassification will affect the required lot
sizes. The minimum lot size for a nonriparian lot in the Natural Environment Lake district
is 20,000; the minimum lot area in the Recreational Development Lake district is 12,000
square feet. The design of the preliminary plat assumes the lake reclassification has been
approved.
Lots: The preliminary plat consists of 77.62 acres to be subdivided into 68 lots for single
family residential development, and 2 outlots for future development. The proposed lot
areas range from 12,000 square feet to over 40,000 square feet. The residential lots meet
the minimum lot area and width requirements.
The plat also includes four outlots. Outlot A, located on the northwest comer, is the site
of future commercial development. Outlot D is the area proposed for High Density
Residential development. Outlot B is a remnant piece of property that will probably be
added to the adjacent property for future development. Outlot C is along the east side of
the property and is intended as parkland.
Streets: This plan proposes six new public streets. The first street is labeled Street 1, and
is a through street extending 2,100' from CSAH 83 to CSAH 42. This street provides
access to the commercial and proposed high density residential area and is designed with a
66' wide right-of-way and a 40' wide surface. It must be noted that the access point of
this street on CSAH 83 is not consistent with the County access guidelines, and must be
moved 50' to the south. The street should also provide access to the labeled "exception"
on the north side of the site.
1:\02files\02 subdivisions\02pr elhn plats\wilds north\wilds north pc.doc
Page 2
Wilds Drive is also extended from the south side of the property 2,500' to an intersection
with Street 1. This street mainly provides access to the residential lots and is designed
with a 50' wide right-of-way and a 32' wide surface.
Street 3 is a 700' long street that extends from one leg of Wilds Drive to another leg. This
street is entirely residential, and is designed with a 50'wide right-of-way and a 32' wide
surface.
The remaining streets are cul-de-sacs providing access to residential lots. The three cul-
de-sacs include:
· Street 4, a 450' long cul-de-sac located on the northeast side of Wilds Drive and
providing access to 11 lots.
· Street 5, a 240' long cul-de-sac located on the north side of Wilds Drive and providing
access to 7 lots.
· Street 6, a 200' long cul-de-sac located on the north side of Wilds Drive and providing
access to 6 lots.
All of the cul-de-sacs are designed with a 50' wide right-of-way, a 60' radius and a 32'
wide surface.
Sidewalks/Trails: There are no sidewalks or trails located within this development.
Parks: Outlot C is intended as parkland for this development. The outlot is 8.5 acres in
size, and is primarily lake and bluffs. There is some value to preserving the bluffs and the
trees at this location. In addition, dedicating this area as park is one of the rationale that
was used to justify reclassification of Hass Lake. However, this area does not completely
satisfy all parkland dedication requirements. Partial credit may be applied to the bluff, but
no credit will be given for the lake.
The Subdivision Ordinance requires 10% of the gross land area be dedicated for park. In
this case, a 7.76 acre park is required. A park, consisting of upland with slopes less than
10% should also be provided within this plat.
Sanitary Sewer/Water Main: Sanitary sewer and water main will be extended from the
existing lines located in Wilds Drive, CSAH 83 and CSAH 42. The Engineering
Department has noted that a temporary lift station is required at this location until the
trunk sewer main is constructed in CSAH 42. The sanitary sewer line must be designed
accordingly. Further analysis may also be required to determine if the existing sanitary
sewer line in Wilds Drive has enough capacity for this development, even on a temporary
basis. In addition, the sanitary sewer and water main should be stubbed to the labeled
"exception."
Storm Sewer: This site drains in several directions. The western portion of the site
generally drains north and west to a NURP pond in the northwest comer of the site.
1:\02filesX02aubdivisio~s~02pfelim plats\wilds nm'~h\wilds north pc.doc Page 3
Much of the residential area is designed to drain towards storm water ponds located
adjacent to Wetland 2 in the center of the site. A portion of the side is also designed to
drain towards a pond adjacent to Hass Lake in the southeast comer of the site. The staff
has not completed review of the hydrological information at this time; however, there are
some changes that must be made. Basin 5, in the southeast comer of the site has no
access and should therefore be eliminated. Also, the backyard storm sewer pipe in Lots
13, 14 and 15, Block 1, should be eliminated.
Tree Replacement: The developer has submitted a Tree Inventory and Removal Plan
that identifies 10,477 caliper inches of significant trees on the site. The Zoning Ordinance
allows a total of 25% of the caliper inches of significant trees to be removed for the
development of roads, utilities and dralnageways, and the removal of an additional 25% of
the significant caliper inches for building pads and driveways. The number of significant
inches removed over and above these percentages must be replaced at a rate of ½" for
each inch removed. This plan proposes to remove 9.6% of the caliper inches of significant
trees for roads and utilities and 10.7% for building pads and driveways. Based on these
calculations, no tree replacement is required.
Landscape Plan: The Subdivision Ordinance requires two front yard subdivision trees
per lot. Comer lots require at least 4 trees. This plat requires a total of 156 subdivision
trees. The developer has submitted a landscaping plan identifying a total of 136 trees.
The plan must be revised to note that comer lots require at least 2 trees per frontage.
Finance/Assessment Fee Review: This development is subject to a collector street fee, a
storm water management fee, and a trunk sewer and water charge. These fees are
outlined in the attached memorandum from the Finance Director.
ANALYSIS:
One of the issues with this plat is the timing of the application. The design of the plat
assumes the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance reclassifying Hass Lake has been
approved. This amendment will be considered by the City Council on June 3fa. Should
the Council approve the amendment, it must be submitted to the DNR for approval. The
preliminary plat cannot be approved until the DNR has approved the reclassification.
Another major issue pertaining to this subdivision is the dedication of parkland. As noted
earlier in the report, partial dedication may be allowed for the area around Hass Lake.
Dedicating this area to the public will ensure preservation of the bluff and trees around the
shoreline. In order to obtain this credit, Outlot C should be labeled as park. In addition,
the lot lines for the lots adjacent to this area, particularly Lots 9-13, Block 1, must be
moved further away from the shoreline. In some areas, the distance between the lot line
and the shoreline is 10 feet. The lots are deep enough so that moving this line will not
reduce the lot area below the minimums.
l:\02files\02subdivisionsX02pr elim plats\wilds north\wilds north pc.doc Page 4
A neighborhood park is also required within this area. The remainder of the parkland
dedication can be satisfied by the dedication of a 3-4 acre park, located somewhere
towards the center of the development.
Another issue pertains to the access point on CSAH 83. Street 1 must be shifted 50' to
the south so it is consistent with the County designated access. In addition, Street 1 must
also provide access to the labeled "exception" on the north side of the site.
As noted in the comments bom the City Engineer, further analysis of the sanitary sewer is
required. In addition, staff has not completed the hydrological review. These analyses
may require some redesign of the utilities.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
At this time, the Planning Commission should make a recommendation on the proposed
Preliminary Plat. If the preliminary plat is to proceed, it should be subject to the following
conditions:
1. The preliminary plat cannot be approved until the DNR has approved the
reclassification of Hass Lake. If this reclassification is not approved, the plat must
be redesigned so all lots meet the minimum lot area and frontage requirements for
a Natural Environment Lake:
2. Provide a neighborhood park within the residential portion of the developmen~
3. Move the rear lot lines for Lots 9-13, Block 1, further away from the Ordinary
High Water Elevation for Hass Lak~
4. Move the access point for Street 1 on CSAH 85 $0' to the south.
$. Provide access to the "exception" from Street 1. In addition, sewer and water
services must be stubbed to this exception.
6. Provide the net lot areas for all lots that include a wetland or storm water pon&
M~nimum lot area is based on net lot are,,
7. Change street names for Streets 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 unique to the Prior Lake street
naming systert~
8. Revise the landscape plan to note 4 trees are required corner lots (2 per street
frontage).
9. Submit an access permit and other required permits for work in the County right-
of-way with the final plat applicatiott
10. Provide a copy of the approved Watershed District permit for this site prior to any
grading.
I1. ,411 utilities and roads must be constructed in conformance with the Public Works
Design Manual-
l:\02file~\O2~ubdiviaion~\O2pr~lim plats\wilds no~h\wilds north pc.doe Page 5
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat subject to the above conditions of
approval and forward this recommendation to the City Council.
2. Recommend denial of the request.
3. Defer action on this preliminary plat to a date specific to allow the developer to submit
the required information.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning staff recommends Alternative #1. The preliminary plat cannot proceed to
the City Council until final action by the DNR on the Hass Lake reclassification.
ACTION REQUIRED:
A motion and second recommending approval of the preliminary plat subject to the listed
conditions is required.
REPORT ATTACHMENTS:
l. Location Map
2. Preliminary Plat of Wilds North
3. Memorandum from City Engineer
4. E-mail fi.om the DNR
5. Memo from City Finance Director
I :\02files\02subdivisions\02prelim plats\wilds north\wilds north pc.doc
Page 6
Location Map
N
1000 0 1000 2000 Feet
Z
~--~--
zO
W
EL
THE WILDS NORTH
PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL NARRATIVE
Subdivision Design Features:
Method ~o which homes shall be designed:
Most homes will be custom designed by homeowner & builder with developer
architectural review
Architectural Style and range of valuation:
The price range of homes will be $300,000.00 and up with higher priced homes
along The Wilds fairway and Haas Lake. The architectural style shall be custom.
Entry features, street lighting, landscaping, neighborhood mailbox locations, etc:
Street lights shall be standard street lights. No signs are anticipated. Mailboxes
shall be the same as The Wilds; cedar boxes in bunches of 2, 3 or 4 as designated
by Post office. Location of mailboxes also to be designated by Post office.
Landscaping requirements shall be the same as The Wilds, which are the
following: 1 - 2 inch ornamental tree in front yard, 2 - 2 inch shade trees (one in
front yard, one in back yard), 20 - 4 gallon shrubs (area surrounding shrubs shall
be rock, not wood chips or sod), Entire front and back yard shall be sodded, not
seeded. If landscaping is not done at final close of lot (house closing), then
Shamrock Development shall escrow funds to be held until satisfactory
completion of landscape requirements.
Location of utilities:
· Location of the utilities will be installed as per City code.
Statement of the proposed use of lots in relation to traffic, fire b~Tards & population:
There are 68 lots for single family homes. There should be no undo effects on
traffic, fire hazards or population
Proposed covenants:
· The Wilds North shall be amended into the covenants of The Wilds.
Misc:
There are 40utlots within this property. Outlot A will be a neighborhood type of
commercial to serve homeowners in the area. Outlot B is zoned for single family
to be used in the future should the existing homeowner along County Road 42
decide to subdivide his property, at which time they will have an access to a City
road and can terminate their access onto County Road 42. Outlot C is a strip
between the single family and Haas Lake, it is our intention to give this Outlot to
the City of Prior Lake so that the City can control access to the lake. This strip
also provides a buffer between future homes and the lake. Outlot D will be upper
scale townhouse, twinhomes or villas.
Persons with interest in The Wilds North:
Owner:
Shamrock Development, Inc.
3200 Main Street, Suite 300
Coon Rapids, MN 55448
Surveyor:
Pioneer Engineering
2422 Enterprise Drive
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
Reg. No. 19828
DATE: May 23, 2002
TO: Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator
FROM: Sue McDermott, City Engineer
RE: Wilds North (Project #02-39)
The Engineering Department has reviewed the preliminary plat submittal for the subject
project and has the following comments:
1. Add City Project #02-39 to all plan sheets.
2. The lift station at this site should be considered "temporary" until the trunk sewer
main is constructed in CSAH 42. The sanitary sewer main in Wilds North should be
redesigned accordingly. The capacity of the sanitary sewer in Wilds Drive will have to
be analyzed to determine if there is enough capacity for this area even on a temporary
basis.
3. Provide an access off of Street 1 and sewer and water stubs to the "exception."
4. In accordance with the ordinance, the city requires 10% of the development to be
dedicated as parkland or 7.76 acres.
5. Access must be provided to all storm basins. It appears that Basin 5 must be
relocated.
6. Redesign the storm sewer to eliminate the backyard pipe in Lots 13, 14 and 15, Block
1.
7. Staff has not completed a review of the hydrologic information at this time.
G:kPROJECTS~2002k39wildsnorth~REVIEW 1 .doc
Jane Kansier
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Pat Lynch [pat.lynch@dnr.state.mn.us]
Monday, May 20, 2002 1:19 PM
J Kansier@cityofpriorlake.corn
wilds north preliminary plat, hass lake #70-78W
Doesn't the change in the lake shoreland designation have to preceed the
paltting process? The riparin lots meet the minimum 20,000 sq ft for a
recreational developmen lake, but many of the non-riparian lots within
the shoreland district are well short of the 15,000 sqare foot minimum.
All but lot 8 in block 2 come up short as do a number in blocks 1 and 3.
I'll stand pretty firm on the minimum lot size for RD lake if we are to
agree to the Shoreland class downgrade from NE to RD.
If the city envisions a trail along the shoreline at the base of the
bluff, please consider increasing the seperation from the lot lines of
Lots 9, 10, and 11, Block 1, and the wetland. I was expecting the city
to aquire more of the wooded slope on the east edge of the development.
Lake and bluff setbacks look ok.
please call if you'd like to discuss.
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
PLANNING/ENGINEERING
Ralph Tesclmer, Finance Director
WILDS NORTH ADDITION -preliminary
(assessraent/fee review)
May 13, 2002
A 77.62 acre parcel comprising PIN #'s 25 928 003 0 thru 003 1 plus PIN #25-928 006 0 thru
006 is proposed to be dm, eloped as The Wilds North Addition. This area has received no prior
assessments for City municipal utilities.
Since utilities are available to the property site, thc cost for the extension of services internally will
be the respons~fiity of the developer. In addition to these improvement costs, thc subdivision will
be subject to thc following City charges:
Park Dedication
Collector Street Fee
Stolma, ater Management Fee
Trunk Sewer & Water Fee
$1685.00/trait
$1500.00/acre
$2943.00/acre
$3500.00/aore
The application of applicable City development charges would generate the following costs to the
developer based upon a net lot area calculation (includes Outlot B) of 26.82 acres of single family
units as provided within the site data sm,,~m'y sheet of the final plat description:
Cash Park Dedication:
Subject to park land detem~ination
Collector Street Fee:
26.82 acres ~ $1500.00/ac = $40,230.00
Storm Water Management Fee:
26.82 acres ~ $2943/ac = $78,931.00
Trunk Sewer & Water Charge:
26.82 acres ~ $3500.00/ac --- $93,870.00
Assuring the initial net lot area of the final plat does not change, the above referenced storm
water, collector street, trunk and lateral sewer and water charges would be determined and
collected within the context of a developer's agreement for the construction of utility improvements
at the time of final plat approval.
There are no other outstanding special assessments currently certified against the property. Also,
the tax status of the property is current with no outstanding delinquencies.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-17.14 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
PRIOR LAI(E
Fax To:
- SPR~NG LAKE WATERSHED DISTRIC'it'
Fax 447-,4.167
3ane Kansler; City of Prior Lake
Fax 952-447-42.45
May [3, 2002
Cc: Nick Polta, Pioneer Englneerlng, fax 652-68;2-9488
.lira Stanton, 763-421-3S00, .fax: 763-421-1:[05
Subject: Wilds .North,
The DIs*.rlct received an application on 5/10/02 fora Watershed District
permit for the subject project,
It appears that the eastern portion of the proposal, approx. 45% of its land
area, Is within the Watershed District. The project recluires a permit from the
Watershed District.
The District will make an initial review and respond with comments by
5/23/02.
16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL S.E. · SUITE 110 · PRIOR' LAKE. MN 55372
Z
I I--
zO
b.J (/)
-I- '~ I~1
I--- Fl 7
Fr" 0 Z
<~n,-
70
-~n,-
I~1
n
,/
0
209
MYSTIC LAKE DRIVE
(COUNTY ROAD 83) .
~ \WETLAND,
~?IREET 6 i
,, ~ io~ :~
1320
262
! /f {
I f I
,i / I
// I
/ I
· 4.,
I
I/I
I/I
II I
/
I
/ I
/ /
I I
I I \
I
I
I ii i/
/ I
0
fill I I II
tttiltltlltlllltii~l~l~tii~ii~
llllllllltllllll~liiilillflfllllllllllllllllllllll
'1
,lt,j~
~il!~l
//"~.\
/
/
/
/ \
/ '"
\
/
I
\
\
I
\
\
:ii
R
/
/
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
5B
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE GRADING AND
EXCAVATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF CSAH 83 AND SOUTH OF CSAH 42
(CASE FILE #02-065)
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
X YES NO-N/A
MAY 28, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
Shamrock Development is proposing to grade and excavate approximately t5 acres of
property located on the east side o CSAH 83, south of CSAH 42 and north of Wilds
Parkway. The purpose of this grading and excavation is to prepare the land for
development prior to preliminary plat approval Section 1101.509 Grading, Filling, Land
Reclamation, Excavation requires a Conditional Use Permit for excavation of more than
400 cubic yards.
SITE ANALYSIS:
Total Site Area: The total site consists of approximately 15 acres.
Tol~o~r. al~hy: This site has a varied topography, with elevations ranging from 998' MSL
at its highest point to 924' MSL at the lowest point. The majority of the site drains to the
wetland at the northwest comer of the property.
Vegetation: This site is primarily pasture and cropland. There are trees located on the
east side of this site, surrounding the old farmstead. These trees do not appear to have
been inventoried. The project is subject to the Tree Preservation requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance.
Wetlands: There is one wetland located within this site, which is approx'unately 26,600
square feet in size. It does not appear the wetland will be disturbed.
Access: Access to the site is from CSAH 83 on the west side of the site.
h~2files~02cup\the wilds nor[h\pc r~'pon.doc 1
16200 Ea§le Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota ,55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax'(952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
2020 Comprehensive Plan Designation: This property is designated for Retail
Community Bus'mess uses on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map.
Zoning: The site is zoned C-2 (Community Business).
REVIEW PROCESS:~
The proposed Conditional Use Permit should be reviewed in accordance with the criteria
found in Section 1108 of the City Code and S~-tion 1101.509. Section 1101.509 is the
provision on Grading, Filling, Land Reclamation, and Excavation. The criteria are
discussed on the following pages.
CitF Code 1101.$09 ~ ~tcav~lon.
Excavation of material exceeding 400 cubic yards of sand, gravel, or other material from
the land shall be permitted only by CUP. The permit application shall include, but is not
limited to, a site plan which shows the finished grade of the land after the excavation has
been completed, the effect of the proposed excavation upon the community and the
adjacent land, the type of material to be extracted from the land, the type of equipment to
be used, the period of time the excavation operation will be conducted, plans for
implementation of measures to guarantee safety of the site and the excavation operation,
plans for rodent and other animal control, fire control, general maintenance of the site
and adjacent area, providing for control of material hauled to or from the site, and.
controls to be employed to limH the effect of wind or other elements on the site and the
material extracted from the site.
The permit application shall include a plan which shows the routes of trucks moving to
and from the site to remove material from the site, an inventory of significant trees on the
site, and other pertinent information necessary to the decision whether to approve the
CUP. No permit shall be granted for a period longer than 12 months.
The CUP shall impose conditions upon the owner of the land to be excavated and the
person performing the excavation operation which will prevent damage to the community
and adjacent landowners during the course of the excavation operation. Those
conditions may impose restrictions in ali areas affecting the excavation operation and the
City may require a Letter of Credit to insure the conditions imposed and the completion
of the work will be performed in the manner described in the plan and CUP.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) ANALYSIS:
Section 1108.200 of the City Code sets forth the criteria for approval ora CUP.
(1)
The use is consistent with and supportive of the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
l:~02filea~O2cup~.l~ wilds nor th~nc mpo~doc 2
O)
(4)
(6)
Two of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan are to strive for a balance of
commerce, industry and population and to encourage a diversified economic
base and broad range of employment opportunities. This grading will prepare
this site for future development, consistent with those goals.
The use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general
welfare of the community as a whole.
In general, the grading of this site should not be detrimental to the health, safety,
morals and general welfare of the community. However, more information on
storm water runoff and the wetland delineation is required before this decision
can be made.
The use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance
and the Use District in which the Conditional Use is located.
Section 1101.509 of the Zoning Ordinance allows Grading, Filling and Lend
Reclamation as a Conditional Use within any zoning district. The conditions set
forth in the Zoning Ordinance will be met with the issuance of the Conditional
Use permit.
The use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities,
services, or improvements which are either existing or proposed.
The grading of the site will not have adverse impacts on governmental facilities,
services or improvements. During excavation, the applicant will be responsible
for maintaining the condition of the adjacent roads.
The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of
properties in close proximity to the conditional use.
The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use end enjoyment of
properties in close proximity. The applicant owns most of the surrounding land.
During excavation, the applicant will be responsible for maintaining the condition
of the adjacent roads.
The use is subject to the design and other requirements of site and
landscape plans prepared by or under the direction of a professional
landscape architect, or civil engineer registered in the State of Minnesota,
approved by the City Council and incorporated as part of the conditions
imposed on the use by the City Council.
The grading plan has been prepared by a civil engineer. Landseaping on the site
will be determined at the time of development.
l:\02file~O2cup~lhe raids north~pc report, doc 3
(7)
The use is subject to drainage and utility plans prepared by a professional
civil engineer registered in the State of Minnesota which illustrate locations
of city water, city sewer, fire hydrants, manholes, power, telephone and
cable lines, natural gas mains, and other service facilities. The plans shall
be included as part of the conditions set forth in the CUP approved by the
City Council.
The plans have been prepared by a civil engineer.
The use is subject to such other additional conditions which the City
Council may find necessary to protect the general welfare, public safety and
neighborhood character. Such additional conditions may be imposed in
those situations where the other dimensional standards, performance
standards, conditions or requirements in this Ordinance are insufficient to
achieve the objectives contained in subsection 1108.202. In these
circumstances, the City Council may impose restrictions and conditions on
the CUP which are more stringent than those set forth in the Ordinance
and which are consistent with the general conditions above. The additional
conditions shall be set forth in the CUP approved by the City Council.
Additional conditions to ensure the protection of the general health, safety and
welfare of the public are included as part of the CUP. These conditions include
the preparation of storm water calculation, wetland delineation, a signed
agreement that the issuance of this grading permit does not give the developer a
vested interest in approval of the preliminary plat as proposed, and responsibility
for road clean up and the need for permits fi.om other governmental agencies.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit request, subject to the following
conclifions:
1. Prior to approval of the grad'rog permit, the applicant must submit storm water
calculations, prepared in accordance with the Public Works Design Manual, for review
and approval by the City Engineer.
2. Prior to approval of the grading permit, the applicant must submit an updated wetland
delineation report.
3. Prior to beginning any work on the site, the applicant must submit a signed statement
noting that approval of this CUP and grading permit does not require that the City
approve a prel'uninary plat as proposed, nor does the permit give the applicant a vested
interest in approval of the preliminary plat as currently proposed. This letter must be
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.
4. Prior to beginning any work on the site, the applicant must obtain a permit from any
other agency as required. Copies of the approved permit must be submitted to the
City.
5. The excavation must be done according to the approved plans.
6. The clean up of gravel as a result of spills or general transportation of gravel on any
public road shall be the responsibility of the applicant.
7. Watering for dust control shall be done on an as needed basis or within 24 hours
written notice from the City. Such notice shall be transmitted by facsimile to the
applicant. Dust control includes the entire project area and is not limited to roadways.
Water for dust control shall be provided from an off-site source.
8. The CLIP is valid for one year, but is revocable at any time for noncompliance with any
COndition contained herein. At the expiration of its one (1) year term, the property
owner may make application to the City to renew the CUP. The initial approval of
this CUP does not create any fight, in law or equity, to the renewal thereof. Any
renewal of the CUP is subject to City Council approval and is to include any
information as requested by City staff or the City Council that would aid the City
Council in determining whether the excavation activities conducted pursuant to this
CUP created any adverse impacts to the health, safety or welfare of the City or its
residents.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the CUP subject to the above conditions.
2. Table this item to a date specific, and provide the developer with direction on the
issues that have been discussed.
3. Recommend denial of the request.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends Alternative #1.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Motion and second to recommend the City Council approve the CUP subject to the listed
conditions.
wilds no~'th~: repo..doc 5
Location Map
~,~ea to be Graded
4O
40, Feet +
Memorandum ]
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
May 1, 2002
5irn-S~ant-oi~, Shamrock-Development
Nick Pe!t 3 ,-Bin n ~-er_EI3gi n e e ri n g___
Sue McDermott, City Engineer
Grading Permit - Wilds North
City Project #02-39
The Engineering and Planning Departments have reviewed the subject grading permit and
have the following comments:
1(~. Provide storm water per Works Design Manual.
calculations
Public
3. The wetland delineation should be updated as it was done more than 5 years ago.
4. The cul-de-sac must be extended to intersect with the road to the north.
5. Provide proof of insurance for the developer/contractor.
6. Provide a bond, letter of credit or deposit of money in the amount of $33,000,
based on 22 acres at $1500 per acre.
7. Provide a permit fee of $1,362.75.
The permit will be issued when these items are addressed. Call me at (952) 447-9831 if
you have any questions.
G:XPROJECTS'~002k39w/ldsnorth\permitreview 1 .DOC
/ ,./ // //
/ I' t
/ /
/ / /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
940 '
/ ~
PLANN{~: RE'PORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
$C
CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY
PLAN AND A PRELIM]II~ARY PLAT TO BE KNOWN
AS JEFF-ERS SOUTH
JANE KANSI~R, PLANNING COORDINATOR
X YES NO-N/A
MAY 28, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
Wensmann Realty, Inc., has applied for approval ora development to be known as Jeffers
South on the property located west of CSAH 21, approximately ~A mile north of CSAH 82
and directly north of Wensmann 1a Addition and Regal Crest. The application includes
the following requests:
· Approve a Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan;
· Approve a Preliminary Plat.
The proposal calls for a mixed use development consisting of a total of 81 dwelling units
on 23.69 net acres, for a total density of 3.42 units per acre. The proposed development
includes 22 single family dwellings and 59 townhouse units in 45, three and four-unit
buildings. The development also includes parkland and private open space.
Wensmann Realty, Inc. is the developer of this project. Paul Oberg, executor of the
Jeffers Estate, the current property owner, has also signed the application.
PHYSICAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Total Site Area: The total site consists of 34.05 acres. The net area of this site, less
County road fight-of-way and wetlands, is 23.69 acres.
Tono~raohv: This site has a varied topography, with elevations ranging from 970' MSL
at its highest point to 900' MSL at the lowest point. The higher poim of the site is located
in the southeast comer of the site. The west ~A of the site generally drains towards the
wetland located along the west side of the site. The eastern portion of the site generally
drains to'the northeast to the existing storm water pond. The property also contains areas
16200 El~~.r,~,,~gi~3~m-a3~372-1714 / Ph. (952)447-4230 / Fax (95~47-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
with slopes exceeding 20 percent, primarily adjacent to the wetland and on the north side
of the site.
Vegetation: This site is a combination of woodland and pastureland. There are several
stands of significant trees, especially around the wetland and in the northeast portion of
the site. The project is subject to the Tree Preservation requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance. The applicant has submitted an inventory of the significant trees on the site,
which identifies 10,871 caliper inches of significant trees. The Tree Preservation
Ordinance allows removal of 25% of the total caliper inches for grading and utilities, and
removal of an additional 25% of the total caliper inches for building pads without tree
replacement. Removal of additional caliper inches requires replacement at a rate of 1/2
caliper inch for each caliper inch removed. Initial calculations indicate no tree replacement
is required.
Wetlands: There is one wetland located within this site, with a total area of 9.40 acres.
The proposal does not include any disturbance of this wetland.
Access: Access to the site is from CSAH 21 on the east side of the site and Jeffers Pass
on the south side of the property.
2020 Comprehensive Plan Designation: This property is designated for Urban Low to
Medium Density Residential uses on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The
entire site is located within the current MUSA boundary.
Zoning: The site is zoned R-I (Low Density Residential). The applicant is not requesting
a rezoning as part of this application. The R-1 district permits a maximum density of 3.6
un/ts per acre.
PROPOSED PLAN
Streets: This plan proposes a combination of public and private streets.
Public Streets: There are three new public streets proposed in this development. The first
street is an extension of Jeffers Pass about 1,050' to the north boundary of the plat, which
will allow for a future connection to the property to the north. Jeffers Pass is designed
with a 55' wide right-of-way, a 32' wide surface and sidewalk along the west side of the
street. The plans also identify a temporary turn-around for Jeffers Pass on the property to
the north. An easement for this turn-around will be required.
The second street is an extension of Raspberry Ridge Road, from its current intersection
with CSAH 21, about 1,040' to the west, where it intersects with Jeffers Pass. This street
is also designed with a 55' right-of-way, a 32' wide surface, and sidewalk along the south
side of the street.
The third new public street is a 350' long cul-de-sac, identified as Circle K, and located on
the west side of Jeffers Pass. This street provides access to 9 single family lots, and is
1:\0 2files\0 2subdivisions\0 2prelim plat.s\jeffers south\jeffe~ pc.doc Page 2
designed with a 50' wide right-of-way and a 32' wide surface. This street cannot be
extended further to the west because of the wetland on the west side of the property.
Private Streets: There are four private streets designed to serve the townhouse portion of
the development. All four of these private streets are located on the south side of
Raspberry Ridge Road. Outlot C is approximately 150' long, with a 24' wide surface, and
provides access to one, 3-unit building. Outlots D and E are approximately 110' long,
with a 28' wide surface, and each provides access to two, 4-unit buildings. Outlot F is
approximately 320' long, with a 32' wide surface, and provides access to three, 4-unit
buildings. Outlot F is the only private street providing access to more than 2 buildings,
and, as such, is probably the only tree private street. The other 3 outlots could be
considered shared driveways since they provide access to only two buildings.
Section 1004.415 lists the design criteria for private streets as follows:
Private streets shall only be permitted m Planned Unit Developments, which have homeowner
associations ~aproved by the City. Private streets shall be platted as outlots, and shall be
designed and constructed in the same mcmner as public streets; providea[ the street pavement
may be contained within the outlot and the baL_~nce of the street right-of-way may be
contained within adjacent easements, provided that the combined width of outlots and
easements shall not be less than the right-of-way, tmvement width and easement requirements
for public streets.
The private streets meet this requirement. Due to its length, Outlot F must be designed
with a cul-de-sac.
Sidewalks/Trails: The plan proposes a sidewalk on the west side of Jeffers Pass and on
the south side of Raspberry Ridge Road. The applicant's narrative also notes that the
current trail system located in Wensmann 14 Addition will be continued along the wetland
through this property; however, that trail is not identified on the plan.
Parks: This plan includes two areas identified as parks, for a total of 13.76 acres. Park 1,
located on the west side of the property is 11.72 acres, but is primarily wetland. There are
also areas of steep slopes within this park. The plan does not identify any access to this
park. Park 2, located on the north side of the plat, is 2.04 acres in area. There is a storm
water pond on this site, as well as steep slopesi Access to this park is from Raspberry
Ridge Road, on the east end of the site. This park also includes areas with steep slopes.
Both parks also include several significant trees.
Section 1004.1000 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires 10% of the gross area of the site
for parkland dedication. Credit is given for wooded areas or dry uplands with slopes less
than 10 percent, No credit is given for wetlands, storm water ponds or steep slopes. In
this case, the required land dedication is 3.4 acres. While the actual area identified as park
exceeds this mount, the developer must provide information to identify how much of this
land will qualify for credit.
l:~02filez~02subdivisions\02prelhn plats\j effers south\jeffers pc.doc page 3
Sanitary Sewer: Sanitary sewer will be extended from the existing utilities located in
CSAH 21. The sewer line is extended from the north through the park area and along the
right-of-way. An easement across the property to the north will be required for the
extension of the sewer line. In addition, the sewer should be extended to the south
property boundary to provide a future service to this site.
Water Main: Water mains will be extended from the existing line in Jeffers Pass and in
CSAH 21 to serve this site. The water main has been extended to the north property
boundary for a future service to the property to the north.
Storm Sewer: The plan proposes a series of storm sewers to handle the storm water
runoff on this site. The system will direct runoff to the north to a NURP pond on the
north side of this site. A portion of that pond is located off-site and will require
easements. A small portion of the site drains to the west. The developer is proposing to
treat the storm water with a vortechnics, rather than a NLIRP pond, before the water
outlets to the wetland.
Density: The plan proposes 81 units on a total of 34.05 acres. Density is based on the
buildable acres of the site, or in this case on 23.69 net acres. The overall density proposed
in this plan is 3.42 units per acre.
Lots: The preliminary plat consists of 22 single family lots and 45 lots for the townhouse
units. There is also one lot for the common open space. The proposal also includes six
outlots. Outlots A and B are located on the north edge of this site, and appear to he
intended for future development. Outlots C, D, E and F are the private streets serving the
townhouse lots.
The minimum lot area and frontage requirements for a single family lot in the R-1 district
are 12,000 square feet and 86 feet at the front building line. Comer lots require 14,400
square feet and 103 feet of width at the front building line. All of the proposed lots meet
the minimum lot area and frontage requirements.
Building Styles: There are two different townhouse building styles proposed. The first
style is a 2-story, attached single family style dwelling with an attached garage. These
buildings are located on the south side of Raspberry Ridge Road. The plan includes 31 of
these units in one 3-unit building and seven 4-unit buildings. Each of the units in these
buildings includes a 2-car garage, rear yard decks and porches, and approximately 2,400
square feet of living space. The buildings are 25' high at the front, with vinyl siding
exteriors and brick face and vinyl shakes for accents.
The second building style is a 2-story, condominium building with upper and lower units.
There are 28 units in 7, 4-unit buildings. These buildings consist of a lower level, 2-car
garage and 1,300 to over 2,000 square feet of living space. These buildings are also 25'
high, with vinyl siding exteriors and brick face and vinyl shakes for accents.
1 :\02files\02 subdivisions\02prelim plals\j effers south\jeffers pc.doc
Page 4
.Building elevations and sample floor plans for each of these buildings are attached to this
report.
The Building Official has also noted that the 2002 International Building Code, scheduled
to be adopted in January 2003, may have significant impact on the construction of these
types of units. The developer will be required to meet any building codes effective at the
time of construction.
Setbacks: The plan proposes a 25' setback from the fi-om property line, a minimum 30'
rear yard setback, and a minimum 25' building separation (foundation to foundation)
between the townhouses. The plan proposes the conventional R-1 setbacks for the single
family dwellings. The plan also notes a 30' setback fi-om any wetland.
The proposed setbacks are generally consistent with the Zoning Ordinance requirements.
The plan sheets should specifically note that there is a 25' setback fi-om the public right-of-
way line required for the townhouses, and that the 30' setback is measured from both
decks and porches. Also, the plan sheets should note that conventional R-1 setbacks
would apply to the single family dwellings.
Lot Coverage: The R-1 district allows a maximum ground floor area of 0.30: The
ground floor area proposed in this plan is 0.14.
Useable Open Space: The R-1 district also requires 600 square feet of useable open
space per unit for cluster developments. Although this proposal is a PUD, it must also
comply with that requirement. The required open space for this development is 35,400
square feet; the plan indicates a total of 92,883 square feet.
Parking: The proposal provides at least 2 spaces per dwelling unit, which is consistent
with the minimum Zoning Ordinance requirements. Each the units have two car garages,
which provide the minimum parking requirement. The plan also provides 14 off-street
parking spaces in the townhouse area for guest parking. The proposed private streets will
not provide any on-street parking.
Landsca~}ine: Section 1107.1900 lists the landscaping requirements for this
development. There are two ditferent typos of landscaping required for this development.
First of all, perimeter landscaping is required for the townhouse portion of the
development with buildings consisting of 3 or more units at a rate of 1 tree per unit or 1
tree per 40' feet of perimeter, whichever is greater. In addition, 2 front yard trees are
required for each single family lot. Our calculations indicate a total of 128 trees are
required for this site.
The developer has submitted a landscaping plan that identifies landscaping for both the
single family and the townhouse portion of the development. The landscaping plan
provides the proper number of trees for the development, and is mostly consistent with
ordinance requirements for size and species of the plantings. The ordinance requires at
least 20% of the plants must exceed the minimum sizes of 2 1/2 caliper inches for
l:~02fil~s~02~ubdivisiom\02prelim pl~ts~jeffers south~j ~ff~rs pc.doc pag* ~
deciduous and 6' for coniferous. While the plan includes the proper number of oversized
deciduous trees, at least 20% of the evergreens must be at least 8' high. The plan does
not indicate whether an irrigation system will be provided.
Tree Replacement: The applicant has submitted an inventory identifying 10,871 caliper
inches of significant trees on the site. The Zoning Ordinance allows up to 25% of the
significant caliper inches to be removed for road and utility purposes, and up to 25% for
building pads and driveways. In this case, the proposal removes 11.3% for road and
utility purposes and 1.9% for building pads and driveways. Therefore, no tree
replacement is required.
Signs: There are three project monument signs identified on this plan. Two are located at
the east entrance to the site. One sign is located at the intersection of Jeffers Pass and
Raspberry Ridge Road. No elevations for these signs have been provided.
Lighting: Street lights will be provided on the public streets. The developer has not
indicated whether or not street lights will be provided on the private streets.
Traffic Impact Report: The developer has submitted an elementary traffic study for this
development. This study indicates the proposed development will generate a total of 475
daily trips. The TlR, however, does not include the proper number of townhouse units.
Although the additional units will probably have an insignificant impact, the TlR must be
revised accordingly. A copy of the submitted TlR is attached to this report.
Phasing: No phasing plan has been submitted for this project. The applicant's narrative
indicates the project will be completed in a single phase.
ANALYSIS:
PUD Preliminar~ Plan: The PUD must be reviewed based on the criteria found in
Section 1106.100 and 1106.300 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 1106.100 discusses the
purpose of a PUD. These criteria are discussed below.
(1) Greater utilization of new technologies in building design, materials, construction
and land development.
The developer has attempted to design the buildings so they fit the land, rather than
force the land to fit the building design. The design, with the exception of the private
street, could also be done as a conventional R-1 cluster development.
(2) Higher standards of site and building design.
The developer is utilizing standard construction and design practices for the
townhomes. The lookout style of the buildings utilizes the natural grades of the site
where possible.
1:\02files\02 subdivisior~\02prelfln plals\jeffers south\jeffers pc.doc Page 6
(3) More efficient and effective use of streets, utilities, and public facilities to support
high quality land use development at a lesser cost.
Maintenance of private streets, including plowing and future repairs, is done by the
homeowners association. This reduces City costs in providing services to these
homes.
(4) Enhanced incorporation of recreational, public and open space components in the
development which may be made more useable and be more suitably located than
would otherwise be provided under conventional development procedures.
The proposed parks preserve the wetland and trees on the site. The park can also
continue the trail connection begun in the development to the south. This same
dedication, however, is required under conventional procedures.
(5) Provides a flexible approach to development which allows modifications to the strict
application of regulations within the various Use Districts that are in harmony with
the purpose and intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
The density and variety of housing units is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
goals to provide a variety of housing styles.
(6) Encourages a more creative and efficient use of land.
The use of the private streets allows for fewer driveway openings on the public streets.
(7) Preserves and enhances desirable site characteristics including flora and fauna,
scenic views, screening and buffering, and access.
The townhouse units are sited to take advantage of the natural views of the wetlands.
The plan provides screening from the adjacent single family homes and the adjacent
County road.
(8) Allows the development to operate in concert with a Redevelopment Plan in certain
areas of the City and to insure the redevelopment goals and objectives within the
Redevelopment District will be achieved.
This criterion is not applicable.
(9) Provides for flexibiltiy in design and construction of the development in cases where
large tracts of land are under single ownership or control and where the use(s) has
the potential to significantly affect adjacent or nearby properties.
The use of the PUD allows the clustering of the homes and the use of private streets.
1:~02files~2mbdivisiom\02prelim plats\jell'ers sotPh\j ~ff~s pc.doc Page 7
(lO)Encourages the developer to convey property to the public, over and above required
dedications, by allowing a portion of the density to be transferred to other parts of
the site.
There is no park dedication or open space dedication over and above that required
under conventional procedures.
Section 1106.300 states the quality of building and site design proposed by the PUD will
enhance the aesthetics of the site and implement relevant goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the following criteria shall be satisfied:
(1) The design shall consider the whole of the project and shall create a unified
environment within the boundaries of the project by insuring architectural
compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation,
aesthetically pleasing landscape and site .features, and efficient use and design of
utilities.
The design creates a unified environment in that all of the buildings will be constructed
of similar materials. The extension of the existing private street allows for efficient
movement of traffic. The landscaping plan, meeting the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance, will also enhance this area.
(2) The design of a PUD shall optimize compatibility between the project and
surrounding land uses, both existing and proposed and shall minimize the potential
adverse impacts of the PUD on surrounding land uses and the potential adverse
effects of the surrounding land uses on the PUD.
The use of the PUD will allow the extension of the single family homes adjacent to the
existing residences, and the clustering of the townhouse units.
(3) If a project for which PUD treatment has been requested involves construction over a
period of time in two or more phases, the applicant shall demonstrate that each phase
is capable of addressing and meeting each of the criteria independent of the other
phases.
This project will be constructed in a single phase.
(4) Approval of a PUD may permit the placement of more than one building on a lot.
This is not applicable.
(5) A PUD in a Residential Use District shall conform to the requirements of that Use
District unless modified by the following or other provisions of this Ordinance.
a. The tract of land for which a project is proposed shall have not less than 200.feet
of frontage on a public right-of-way.
l:\02files\02subdivisionsX02prelim plals\jeffers south\jeffers pc.doc Page 8
b. No building shall be nearer than its building height to any proper~y line when the
property abutting the subject property is in an "R-J" or "R-2" Use District.
c. No building within the project shall be nearer to another building than ~ the sum
of the building heights of the two buildings, except for parl~ng ramps which may
be directly connected to another building.
d Private roadways within the project site may not be used in calculating required
off-street parlong spaces.
The modification requested by the developer include the following:
· The use of private streets
This modification is permitted under the PUD provisions at the discretion of the Council.
Prdiminar~ Plat: The primary issue relating the preliminary plat is the dedication of
parkland. The developer must provide calculations identifying how much of the actual
land will qualify for credits. At least 10% of the gross area, or 3.40 acres, must be
dedicated as park. The attached memorandum from the City Engineer also identifies
necessary revisions.
Staff Recommendation: One of the major issues pertaining to this development is
whether or not the plan meets the PUD criteria. The primary justification for a PUD
appears to be the use of the private streets. A cluster development of this type is
permitted as a conditional use permit in the R-1 district, so a similar development with
public streets could be done without a PUD. The plan is consistent with the requirements
for a conventional cluster development. Only Outlot F is a private street, since it provides
access to 3 buildings. The other outlots could be considered shared driveways. If one of
the buildings were eliminated, Outlot F would also be a shared driveway and the PUD
would not be required.
The other major issue pertaining to this development is the park dedication. The
developer needs to provide information indicating how much of the park area will qualify
for dedication credit. Also, a plan for the trail extension must be provided. Finally, access
to the park on the west side of the property must be provided from Jeffers Pass.
If the Planning Commission finds that the PUD process is appropriate for this
development, the staff would recommend the following conditions be attached:
1. The developer must provide specific information on the parldant~ detailing the
area that qualifies for dedication credi~
2. The developer must provide an access to the park on the west side of the site from
Jeffers Pas&
3. Extend the trail from tVensrnann 1't to the north edge of this developmen~ '
4. The name of the cul-de-sac must be changed to a name more consistent with the
street naming policy.
l:\02files\O2aubdivisions\O2pr~lim plats\j efl'~s south\j effe, rs pc.doc Page 9
5. The landscaping plan must be revised to include 20% of the evergreen trees as
oversized trees An irrigation plan mast also be provided
6. Thedeveiopermustprovideeasementsforthestortnwaterpondandthetemporary
cul-de-sac located on the adjacent property.
7. The developer must provide sign elevations for the monument signs.
8. The Traffic Impact Report must be revised to include the proper number of units.
9. Revise the plan sheets to specifically note that there is a 25' setback frorn the public
right-of-way line required for the townhouses, and that the 30' setback is measured
from both decks and porches. Also, the plan sheets must note that conventional R-
I setbacks will apply to the single family dwelling~
10. Address the comments identified in the memorandum from the City Engineer dated
May 23, 2002.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
At this time, the Planning Commission should make a recommendation on the proposed
PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the PUD Preliminary Plan and the Preliminary Plat subject to
the above conditions.
2. Table this item to a date specific, and provide the developer with direction on the
issues that have been discussed.
3. Recommend denial of the request.
4. Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning staff recommends Alternative #1.
ACTION REQUIRED:
A motion and second recommending approval of the following requests:
· Approval of a Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan to be known as Jeffers
South subject to the above conditions;
· Approval of a Preliminary Plat to be known as Jeffers South, subject to the above
conditions.
EXHIBITS:
1. Location Map
1:\02 files\02subdivisiol~\02pr elim plats\jeffers south\jeffers pc.doc Page 10
2. Aerial Photo
3. Reduced Copy of PUD and Preliminary Plat Plans
4. Developer's Narrative
5. TIR
6. Engineering Department Comments
7. Building Department Comments
8. Finance Director Comments
9. Scott County Highway Department Comments
l:\02ffies\O2subdivisioas\O2prelim plats~jeffers south\j~fe~ pc.doc Page 11
Location Map
_/ <rj
I'jeffers South'
N
1000 0 1000 2000 Feet
HinOS S~3JJ3P
II
1 ' '
· .
I I
PRELIMINARY PLAT/PUD APPROVAL
WENSMANN REALTY, INC
"JEFFERS SOUTH"
APRIL 26, 2002
Applicant:
Consulting Engineer:
Wensmann Realty, Inc
1895 Plaza Drive, Suite 200
Eagan, MN 55122
651-406-4400
Fax 651-905-3678
Attn. Ms. Kelly Murray
Mr. Terry Wensmann
Pioneer Engineering
2422 Enterprise Drive
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
651-681-1914
Fax 651-681-9488
Atm. Mr. Nick Polta
Site:
Site Area
The proposed site is located west of Co 21, North of the Wensmann 1st Addition, and east
of the Wilds. The proposed subdivision is in section 34, with the remainder of the 380+/-
acre Jeffers Estate in Section 27. The property is a separate parcel of record from the
balance of the Jeffers Estate and includes approximately 34 acres.
The total site consists of 34.05 acres. The net area of this site, less wetlands, is
approximately 22.99 acres.
Significant
Features:
Parkland
This site has a mixture of natural features including: steep slopes, wetlands, significant
tree stands and open farmland. A complete tree inventory has identified 991 significant
trees on the site, with only 156 disturbed during construction operations, representing
only a 13.2% removal. The steep slope areas have either been preserved, or the building
designs are such that they work with the slope to minimize the impact. Building
modifications will be made on a case by case basis to keep as many of the trees as
possible. The use of decks in cases where a tree might be lost to construct a concrete
sidewalk will be implemented on a house by house basis. The site also contains 94 acres
of wetlands. No wetlands are impacted as part of this proposed development.
The proposed plat continues a plan initiated with the Wensmann lst Addition to construct
a trail system from Co 82, north through the Wensmann 1~ Addition, following the edge
of the large wetlands, north to eventually connect to trails along either Co 21 or Co 42.
Streets
Zoning
This entire area is being dedicated as parkland. However, credits will be based on
useable area. Wansmann Realty has an option to purchase additional land immediately
north of the proposed plat and will continue to develop this wail system as progress
northward is made.
The streets in Jeffers South are proposed to be public. However, 4 private drives
offRaspberry Ridge Road require approval through the PUD process. Sidewalks are
proposed on the West side of Jeffers Pass and the South Side of Raspberry Ridge Road.
Additional off-street parking is achieved in the private drive areas, keeping guest parking
off the public streets.
The development is currently zoned R-1 and as part of this request, Wansmann Realty is
requesting a re-zoning to R-I PUD.
Phasing
The proposed development will be constructed in one phase.
Landscaping
Monuments
Drainage
Easements
The Jeffers South Condominium Association and the Jeffers South Townhome
Association will both have irrigation systems as part of the final landscaping design.
Three monuments are requested within this development and are shown on the site plan
and are located within common areas of the associations. Final monument designs will
be included as part of our final plat approval.
Generally, all drainage and utility easements required will be included within the final
plat of Jeffers South. However, a storm water pond is proposed to be constructed north
of the plat boundary. Therefore a permanent drainage and utility easement that will be
granted to the City of Prior Lake has been created and agreed upon by the Jeffers Estate.
A copy of the proposed easement area i~ included with this submission.
By utilizing the PUD process, we are able to enhance the development in the following areas.
More efficient and effective uses of streets, utilities and public facilities to support high
quality land use development at a lesser cost.
The private drives will be maintained by the homeowners association, including
plowing and future repairs within the area designated as .leffers South Townhome
Association. This will reduce cost to both the city for future repairs, yet save on
snowplowing fees because the contractor will not have to come back after the city plows
go through
Enhanced incorporation of recreation public and open space components in the
development.
Parkland dedication and trail locations are placed along the wetlands, rather
than including the areas within the single family lots. In doing so, the public will have
the opportunity to enjoy the views and natural features of this area while they use the
trails instead of becoming addition rear yard space.
Encourages a more creative and efficient use of land and a flexible approach to
development.
Using the PUD process to creative private drives allows for better use of open
space by clustering a denser housing style in open area, and lower density designs in the
forested areas. The PUD process also keeps driveways from packing directly onto a
public street for 31 of the homes. This mixture of different housing styles also creates a
variety of price points to better meet the needs of the community.
Preserves and enhances desirable site characteristics including flora and fauna, scenic
view and buffering.
The location of the higher density homes in the open space and lower densities
in the wooded and steep slope areas helps maintain an overall average that could not
otherwise be achieved Homes are located in a manner to take advantage of the natural
screening that the wooded cluster of trees can provide.
Provides for flexibility in design and construction of the development in cases where
large tracts of land are under single ownership or control and where the uses have the
potential to significantly affect adjacent or nearby properties.
The proposal has allowed for additional phasing of the condominium units as
the Development moves to the north. The use of the PUD also allows for the private
drives to minimize the number of cars that back onto apublic street, yet maximizing the
use of the land.
Preliminary
Engineering Project Summa
for the
Jeffers South Development
Prior Lake
I. Description of Project
The site is approximately 34 acres located west of Scott County, Road 21 directly opposite of
Raspberry Ridge Road. The subject site is in Section 34, Township 115, Range 22, Scott
County, Minnesota.
The proposed project includes the grading, utility and street construction for 21 single family
units and 59 multi-family units. This will include the extension of Jeffers pass from the south
to the north property lines as well as the extension of Raspberry Ridge Road from Co. Rd. 21
to the west.
The ~ading, utility and street construction will begin in June and run until the Fall of 2002.
II. Project Manager
The project manager and project engineer sha/1 be responsible for various aspects of the
construction and are as follows:
Proiect Manager
Terry. Wensmann
Wensmana Realty
3312 151'~ Street West
Rosemount, Mn 55068
(651)406-4400
Proiect Eneineer
Nicholas Polta
Pioneer Engineering
2422 Enterprise Drive
Mendota Heights, Mn 55124
(651)681-1914
III. Existing Site Conditions
The site has been partially farmed within the last few years with row crops. The rest of the site
is wooded, with oaks, ash, aspen and maple as the primary species.
The surrounding land uses are residential to the east and south; the north and west are
primarily undisturbed wetlands or woods with the remainder in agricultural uses.
I-V. Soils and Slopes
The United States Department of Agricultures Soil Survey identifies the onsite soils are
primarily Hayden Series these soils are described as good for embankment and foundations.
The lowlands and wetlands Glencoe series soils that are not suitable for construction, these
areas will be avoided during construction. Comprehensive soil testing was performed onsite by
Twin City Testing(report inclosed), their analysis substantiates the suitability of the onsite
soils for the construction purposes of the development.
Topsoil will be stripped and stockpiled onsite to provide for six (6) inches of respread across
all turf areas after completed grading.
The site has 4.09 acres of slopes in excess of 2C percent (%). Approximately 0.34 acres of
these slopes are will be graded to build streets and building pads for this development.
V. Erosion Control Measures
Approved best management practices (BMP) of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) as stipnlated in Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas shall be followed. These
include but are not limited to the following:
Ail denuded and Stockpile areas shall not have a slope greater than 3:1
Ali disturbed area shall receive temporary seed, mulch and disc anchoring if no
significant grading is to occur for 30 days.
All finished grade area shall be seeded mulched and anchored within 48 hours after
complete grading.
A seed mixture designed for the soil characteristics and area plantings shall be
approved by the City Engineer.
A separate cool seed mixture will be designed for dormant seed planting in the fall.
Peak Discharge from all storm sewers shall not exceed the original peak discharge from
the watershed.
All storm sewer outlets shall have rip rap outlets designed to City Standards.
All Storm Sewer outlets shall not have discharges greater than 4 feet per second.
Gravel construction entrances and a street sweeping program shall be used to e~sure
minkaal soil is removed from the site.
Inlet protection for storm sewer shall be implememed until streets are paved and turf is
established.
Utilize proposed water quality ponds as temp sediment traps; directing water during
construction to the ponds. Ponds will be pumped down and proposed volume will be
restored after vegetation is established.
Erosion consol fences shall be installed and maintained around all wetlands and water quality
ponds until area plantings have been established.
VII. Storm Water Management
The site can be broken into two general watersheds, I (north) and II (west). The new
development within Watershed I consists primarily of the development of the 7 condominium
buildings (28 units) 31 attached townhomes and 8 single family homes. The stormwater
management system for this area consists of a infiltration basin for small storm events and a
NLrRp standard.basin for larger storm events. The NURP basin is sized to treat the entire area
of Watershed I. A manhole flow splitter device will be used to regulate the flow to each
basin..
Watershed II consists of I 1.62, 2.11 acres of which are development for 9 single family lots '
the remainder consists of rear yards and undisturbed woods draining to the wetland to the
west. Due to the small size of the developed drainage area and the wooded nature of the
remaining drainage area it is considered prudent to use an alternative to area intensive
treatments such as infiltration and stormwarer management basins. It is proposed to use a
Vortechnics, Vortechs Model 4000. This in-Iine treatment structure has been used in the past
under similar circumstances. The use of this type of devise will save approxh'nately 1/2 acre of
mature trees along the western wetland.
Attached are the preliminary calculations and drainage maps for your review.
The following is a list of the BMP's required by the Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed
District under rule D 3 i (i) and (ii).
Section i
(aa) Vegated swales have been used in rear yards when possible. This will allow for
some irrfilrration under small storm events.
(bb) Pond outlet will be above the ~ound water level.
(cc) Roof Drainage will be direct to pervious areas when available. Due to the design
of the condominium and townhouse buildings, interior roof lines may need to drain to
driveways.
(rid) The site wilI increase detention time for runoff as well as increase storage capacity.
by the creation of stormwater management facilities and utilizing the storage available
in the existing wetlands.
(ce) The number of parking stalls are dictated by the City zoning code.
(fi) Rural roads are not allowable and road widths are dictated by City Standards.
Through the City PUD process the private streets within the condominium site have
been reduced from 32'width street with a 50' public fight of way. To a 28' and 24'
private drives with no public right of way. This eliminates 4'-8' width from the street
and 8'-12' of driveway length on each side of the street.
(gg) After topsoil respread and seeding the entire site will be disced with hay for
erosion. The condominium building will have extensive foundation planting and
rediscing before sodding.
Section ii
The impervious surfaces created by the entire Jeffers South site are 7.45 acres making the
volume required for infiltration 0.31 acre*feet. The soil tests indicates sandy loam in the cut
area of the infiltration basin sandy loams areas are considered 'A' soils by the SCS, with a
estimated infiltration rate of 0.30 inches/hour.
(0.30 in/hr) / (12in/it) * 72hr * .25 acres = 0.45 acre * feet of available infiltration
Providing more the then the PLSLWD rules require.
VIII. Wetland Delineation
A Wetland Identification, Delineation and Classification report was conduct by Schoell & Madson,
Inc. and is provided for your reference..
IX. Construction Sequencing
The following is a rough schedule for construction, contingent upon the approval of the proje,zt by all
pertinent regulatory agencies:
Install erosion control fence, tree preservation fence and gravel construction entrances.
June 15, 2002
II. Clear and grub site.
June 15, 2002
IH.
Construct water quality pond and create diversion to direct runoff to pond.
June 22, 2002
IV.. Begin Mass grading.
June 25, 2002
Respread topsoil, mulch and disc anchor with appropriate seed mixture.
August 15, 2002
VI. Begin construction of utilities and streets.
Augus~ 1, 2002
VII. End construction of utilities and streets.
September 30, 2002
VIII. Pump down pond, restore volume. Remove silt fence,
June 15, 2003
Mm~ 09 02 01: l~p Pioneep En~ineenin~ 851881B488 p.~
Trip Generation
for
Jeffers South
in
City of Prior Lake
The following information is from Trip Generation gh Addition, Institute of Transportation
Engineers.
Assumptions:
45 Townhome Units
22 Single Family Detached Units
Traffic generation considers the Jeffers South independently
1. Average Daily Trips
5.86 trips per townhome unit per day
9.57 trips per single family unit per day
(45*5.86) + (22*9.57) = 475 trips per day attributed to the development
Disbursement
50% trips in -- 237.5 trips per day
50% trips out = 237.5 trips per day
2. Peak Hour Morning Traffic - 7-9 A.M.
0.44 trips per townhome unit
0.77 trips per single family unit
(45*0.44) + (22*0.77) = 19.8 + 16.94 = 36.74 trips in peak A.M.
Disbursement
Townhome - 18% trips in, 82% trips out
Single Family unit - 25 % trips in, 75 % trips out
(19.8'0.18) + (16.94'0.25) = 7.80 trips in
(19.8'0.82) + (16.94'0.75) = 28.94 trips out
2. Peak Hour Evening Traffic - 4-6 P.M.
0.54 trips per towrdaome unit
1.06 tr/ps per single family unit
(45*0.54) + (22'1.02) = 24.3 + 22.44 --- 46.74 trips in peak PM.
Disbursement
Townhome - 65 % trips in, 35 % trips out
Single Family unit - 64% trips in, 36% trips out
(24.3*0.65) + (22.44*0.64) = 30.16 trips in
(24.3*0.35) + (22.44*0.36) = I6.58 trips out
DATE: May 23, 2002
TO: Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator
FROM: Sue McDermott, City Engineer
RE: Jeffers South (Project #02-31)
The Engineering Department has reviewed the preliminary plat submittal for the subject
project and has the following comments:
1. Add City Project #02-31 to all plan sheets.
2. Continue the trail from Wensmarm 1st to the north edge of Jeffers South.
3. Parkland dedication (10%) will be required.
4. Private Drive F will have to be designed in accordance with the Public Works Design
Manual: 32' wide and cul-de-sac.
5. Provide an easement fi.om the adjacent property owner to the north for the sanitary
sewer connection and the storm basin.
6. See additional comments on WCA and hydrology on attached memo from WSB.
GSPROJECTSX2002~3 lj e fferssouth~X.EVIEW 1 .doc
& fi. ssociates, Inc.
Memorandum
F~om~
Date:
Re:
Sue McDermott, P.E., City Engineer
City of Prior Lake
A ndi Moffatt
John Mackiewicz
}IzSB & Associates, Inc.
May 20, 2002
Review of Jeffers South Development Project
~VSB Project No. 1430-14
As requested, we have completed our water resource review of the plans dated March 26,
2002 and received April 26 and May 7, 2002 for the Jeffers South Development Project.
Based on our review, we offer the following comments:
Wetland Conservation Act Review Comments
1. Wetlands were delineated between April 14 - June 16, 1998. Twelve basins were
identified. This wetland delineation will be verified by the City in the upcoming
weeks.
2. The Plans adequately show the required 30' buffer around the wetlands.
No wetland impact is proposed as part of Jeffers South development. Therefore,
no wetland replacement plan approval is needed as part of the Wetland
Conservation Act for this portion of the proposed development.
Hvdrologic/Hvdraulic~ Water Qualitw~ and Grading Comments
The Scott County Soil Survey indicates that B soils are present on this site.
Unless soil borings are taken in the infiltration area that indicate otherwise, an
infiltration rate of 0.15 inches/hour should be used to calculate the infiltration
rate.
May 20, 2002
_Page 2 of 3
10.
11.
12.
13.
Based on City standards, the last street-assessable structure before runoff enters a
waterbody is required to have a 3-foot sump. These sumps need to be included
on the plans.
Storm water runoffneeds to be treated prior to entering the infiltration basin.
Storm water runoff needs to be pretreated to NURP recommendations prior to
discharge into wetlands.
The storm sewer design calculations and profiles need to be included with the
next submittal.
Both the discharge rate and the discharge volume to the existing wetland out of
proposed Subcatchments 3 and 4 have increased in the proposed conditions. This
needs to be addressed to maintain and/or reduce the existing discharge rate (see
also Comment #7).
As per City policy, the proposed two-year event discharge rates must be held to
one-half of the existing discharge rates within the Jeffers Pond District. The 100-
year discharge rates must match the existing rates for the development and also
the discharge rate for the Jeffers Pond District as shown in the City's Local
Surface Water Management Plan.
The area draining offsite in proposed subcatchment 5S has increased from the
area that previously drained offsite, both in size and impervious area. It is unclear
why this drainage boundary has changed. An explanation needs to be provided by
the developer.
There is a considerable amount of impervious area that drains offsite. Every
effort should be made to provide NURP treatment for all impervious areas.
Design for all retaining Walls should be completed by an engineer and included
with the plans.
Pond 2 on the preliminary grading plan does not appear to correspond to Pond 2
in the hydrologic calculations. The developer needs to provide an explanation or
adjustment to the plan and/or calculations.
The details for all skimmer and outlet structures need to be shown on the plans.
It appears a considerable number of lots will require custom grading. Grading
and erosion control comments will be withheld until a more detailed grading plan
is submitted.
G:lPROJECT~12OO2131jefferssouth~O$2OO2sm-jeffers. doc
May 20, 2002
Page 3 of 3
This concludes our review of these plans. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please feel free to call me at (763)287-7196.
c. Dave Hutton, P.E., WSB
G: IPR OJECTSI200213 ljefferssouth 1052002sm~jeffers. doc
MEMORANDUM
DATE: MAY 17, 2002
TO:
SANE KANSIER
FROM: ROBERT D. HUTCHINS
YEFFERS SOUTH DRC PROJECT SITE REVIEW
Comments:
1. Retaining Walis over 4' in height to have a building permit and to be structurally engineered.
The in ground horizontal deadman retairfing supports must be located on this parcel and not cross
the property line.
2. Locate Lawn irrigation system service stub, location of water meter and pressure vacuum
breaker. The equipment should be located at the highest elevat!on of the project as the pressure
vacuum breaker must be 1.0' above the highest elevated sprinkler head.
3. A lawn irrigation permit including a plan layout is required.
4. Provide Fire Department turn around on dead-ends over 150 feet in length. Uniform Fire Code
902.2.2.4.
5. The International Building Code (IBC) should be adopted on January 1, 2003. The Building
Department is in the process of analyzing the 2002 IBC. The stacked condominiums and side-by-
side townhome construction appear to have significant construction changes with the new code
compared to the existing 1997 Uniform Building Code. The two different buildings can be built
under the existing UBC and with the adoption of IBC on January 1, 2003; the new code will be
required to be used.
Recommend denial based on item 5.
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
PLANNING/ENGINEERiNG
Ralph Teschner, Finance Director
JEFFER'S SOUTH- preliminaty
(assessment/fee review)
May 7, 2002
A 34 acre parcel comprising PIN #25 934 003 0 is proposed to be developed as Jeffer's South.
This area has received no prior assessments for City municipal utilities.
Since utilities are available to the property site, the cost for the extension of services imemally will
be the respons~ility of the developer. In addition to these improvement costs, the subdivision will
be subject to the following City charges:
Park Dedication
Collector Street Fee
Stormwater Management Fee
Trunk Sewer & Water Fee
$1685.00/trait
$1500.00/acre
$2943.00/acre
$3500.00/acre
The application of applicable City development charges would generate the following costs to the
developer based upon a net lot area calculation of 15.45 acres of single family and townhouse units
as provided within the site data summary sheet of the preliminary plat description:
Cash Park Dedication:
Subject to park land delem~ination
Collector Street Fee:
15.45 acres ~ $1500.00/ac = $23,175.00
Storm Water Management Fee:
15.45 acres ~ $2943/ac = $45,469.00
Trunk Sewer & Water Charge:
15.45 acres @ $3500.00/ac = $54,075.00
Assuming the initial net lot area of the fmal plat does not change, the above referenced storm
water, collector street, tnmk and lateral sewer and water charges would be determined and
collected within the context of a developer's agreement for the construction of utility improvements
at the time of final plat approval.
There are no other outstanding special assessments currently certified against the property. Also,
the tax status of the property is current with no outstanding delinquencies.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
BRADLEY J. LARSON
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/
COUNTY HIGHWAY ENGINEER
May 17, 2002
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT · 600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST · JORDAN, MN 55352-9339
(952) 496-8346. Fax: (952) 496-8365 o www. co.scott.mn.us
Jane Kansier
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Preliminary Plat, Jeffers South
CSAH 21 - North of CSAH 82
Dear Jane:
We have reviewed the preliminary plat as it relates to Highway Department issues and
offer the following comments or concems:
· We would like the opportunity to review the Final Plat to be sure it accurately reflects
all right-of-way and easements along this property that were acquired by the County.
· Any change in drainage entering the County right-of-way shall require detailed
drainage calculations to be submitted to the County Engineer for review and
approval.
* No berming, landscaping, ponding, or signage shall be permitted in the County right-
of-way.
* Any work within the County right-of-way shall require a utility permit.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please feel free to
contact me.
Sincerely,
Craig Jenson
Transportation Planner
An Equal Opportuni~./Safety Aware Employer
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
6A
CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FINAL PLAN TO
BE KNOWN AS FOUNTAIN HILLS 2ND
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
YES X NO-N/A
MAY 28, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
Wensmann Realty has applied for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Final
Plan for the property located on the west side of Pike Lake Trail, approximately 1/8 mile
south of CSAH 42 and directly south of Fountain Hills Drive. The total site area in the
PUD includes 10.16 acres, zoned R-4 (High Density Residential). The development
consists of 64 townhouse units and common open space.
BACKGROUND:
On April 1, 2002, the City Council adopted Resolution #02-44 approving a Planned Unit
Development Preliminary Plan for this site, as well as a preliminary plat. The resolution
listed the following conditions of approval:
1. The private streets must be designed so that the sum of the width of the outlot and the
adjacent easements is equal to 50 feet.
2. Extend sanitary sewer and water main to the south property boundary.
3. Provide a drainage easement and storm sewer pipe from the south side of the wetland
on the east side of the property to the south property line for the future use of the
property to the south.
4. Provide a drainage and utility easement on Lot 1, Block 1, Fountain Hills Addition,
for the sanitary sewer pipe located within this lot.
5. Provide the information necessary to show how the drainage will work behind Unit
#4 to achieve a 2% swale.
6. Provide retaining wall profiles and design by a registered engineer.
1:\02files\02puds\fountain hills 2nd final\pc report, doc Page I
16200 Ea§le Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
7. Revise the landscaping plan to include the required number of oversized trees.
8. Verify that the setback between the buildings and the wetland is 30' to the 100-year
flood elevation of the wetland.
9. Indicate whether signs will be provided for the townhouse development. If so,
provide sign elevations and greater detail on the location of the proposed monument
signs.
10. Provide a lighting plan identifying the footcandles at the south property line that are a
result of the wall lighting on the south side of the units.
11. Provide a phasing plan for the project.
12. Provide an irrigation plan.
13. Provide street names for the private streets.
14. Ensure that the tie-ins to the existing 8" water main valve on Pike Lake Trail will be
acceptable for hook-ups and testing.
15. Proved a concrete entrance to the easterly entrance to the new sidewalk. The westerly
entrance will require a valley-gutter where needed.
PROPOSED FINAL PLAN
DensiW,: The plan proposes 64 units on a total of 10.16 acres. Density is based on the
buildable acres of the site, or in this case on 7.17 net acres. The overall density proposed
in this plan is 8.9 units per acre. The allowable density in the R-4 district is 30 units per
acre.
Building S .tyles: The proposed plan calls for a townhouse style development consisting
of 4-, 6- and 10-unit buildings. There are two different building styles proposed. The
first style is a 2-story, row house style with tuck under garages. These buildings are
located on the outer ring of the site, to take advantage of the natural grade. The plan
includes 34 of these units in one 4-unit building and five 6-unit buildings. The second
building style is a 3-story, back-to-back townhouse building. There are 30 units in three,
10-unit buildings. Building elevations and sample floor plans for each of these buildings
are attached to this report.
Setbacks: The plan proposes the following setbacks:
Proposed Minimum
Front (foundation to back of curb) on 22' 30'
row houses
Front (deck to back of curb) on 10-unit 14' 30'
buildings
Rear (to property line) 30' minimum 25'
Side (between buildings) 25' 35' (~/2 sum of the
l:\02files\02puds\fountain hills 2nd final\pc report,doc Page 2
Wetland (100-year flood elevation)
30'
building heights)
30'
Lot Coverage: The R-4 district allows a maximum ground floor area of 0.35. The
ground floor area proposed in this plan is 0.21.
Useable Open Space: The R-4 disthct requires 600 square feet of useable open space
per unit for cluster developments. The proposed common area provides open space for
this development consistent with the ordinance requirc~ments.
Parking: The proposal provides at least 2 spaces per dwelling unit, which is consistent
with the minimum Zoning Ordinance requirements. All of the units have two car
garages, which provides parking for both occupants and tandem spaces for guests. The
developer has also provided 30 off-street guest spaces. The proposed private streets will
not provide any on-street parking.
Landscaping: The landscaping plan provides screening around the perimeter of the site.
The plan pays special attention to providing screening along the south property boundary,
where the new trees, along with the existing trees, will screen this development fi.om the
adjacent property. The landscaping plan provides the proper number of trees for the
development. It also is consistent with ordinance requirements for the mix of species of
the plantings; however, it does not include the proper mix for the size of evergreen trees.
At least 20% of the evergreens must be oversized, or at least 8' in height. Finally, an
irrigation plan has been provided.
Signs: This proposal includes 1 project monument sign. The plan does not identify the
location of this sign. The proposed sign is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance
requirements.
Lighting: Streetlights will be provided on the public streets. The developer has also
indicated street lights will be provided on the private streets by the public utility
company. The cost and maintenance of the streetlights on the private streets will be
borne by the homeowner's association. A lighting distribution plan must be provided to
indicate the impact of any lights on the south side of the tm/ts.
Streets: The pLTD plan includes the use of private streets to serve the townhouse
development, which will be maintained by a homeowner's association. THe streets also
meet the Subdivision Ordinance requirements.
Sidewalks/Trails: The plan proposes a trail around the wetland on the east side of the
site as part of the common open space for the townhouse development. This trail
connects to the existing sidewalk along the east side of Fountain Hills Court.
Parks: This plan does not include any parkland dedication. A cash dedication, in lieu of
land, was made at the time the first plat, Fountain Hills Addition, was completed.
l:\02files\02puds\fountain hills 2nd final\pc report.doc Page 3
Phasing: This project is proposed to be completed in a single phase.
ANALYSIS:
The Final PUD Plan is generally consistent with the approved preliminary plan. There
are, however, some changes are required to the plan before final approval. These changes
are required in order to be consistent with the approved preliminary plan, and to meet the
conditions included as part of the preliminary plan approval. These include the
following:
1. The setback from the decks to the east property line is only 28 feet. The setback
approved in the preliminary plat was 30 feet, The decks on these units must be
trimmed to meet the 30' setback.
2. The table listing the setbacks on the PUD Plan must be clarified to note that the
setback is measured from the structure, including decks. Also, the setback fi.om the
wetland is measured from the 100-year flood elevation of the wetland.
3. The developer must provide street names for the private streets.
4. The landscaping plan must be revised so at least 20% of the evergreens (5 trees) are
8' in height.
5. The plan must be revised to include the location of the monument sign.
6. Provide retaining wall profiles and design by a registered engineer.
7. A lighting distribution plan, identifying the footcandles at the south boundary of the
site that are a result of the wall lighting on the south side of the units must be
provided.
Most of the changes require minor revisions to the plans. However, these changes must
be made before the plan proceeds to the City Council for final approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission must review the Final PUD and make a recommendation to
the City Council. The staff suggests the following findings:
1. With the above listed revisions, the Final PUD Plan is consistent with the approved
preliminary plan.
2. The Final PUD Plan is consistent with the criteria for a PUD listed in Section
1106.100 and 1106.300 of the Zoning Ordinance. This plan is also consistent with
the City Council findings listed in City Council Resolution #02-44.
The staff also recommends approval of the Final PUD Plan be subject to the following
conditions:
1:\02files\02puds\fountain hills 2nd final\pc report.doc Page 4
1. The following revisions must be made before the plan proceeds to the City Council:
a. The setback from the decks to the east property line is only 28 feet. The setback
approved in the preliminary plat was 30 feet. The decks on these units must be
trimmed to meet the 30' setback.
b. The table listing the setbacks on the PUD Plan must be clarified to note that the
setback is measured from the structure, including decks. Also, the setback from
the wetland is measured from the 100-year flood elevation of the wetland.
c. The developer must provide street names for the private streets.
d. The landscaping plan must be revised so at least 20% of the evergreens (5 trees)
are 8' in height.
e. The plan must be revised to include the location of the monument sign.
f. Provide retaining wall profiles and design by a registered engineer.
g. A lighting distribution plan, identifying the footcandles at the south boundary of
the site that are a result of the wall lighting on the south side of the units must be
provided.
2. The Final Plat and Development Contract must be approved by the City Council.
3. A signed PUD agreement must be approved by the City Council.
4. Upon final approval, the developer must submit two complete sets of full-scale final
plans and reductions of each sheet. These plans will be stamped with the final
approval information. Once set will be filed at the Planning Department and
maintained as the official PUD record. The second set will be returned to the
developer for their files.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the PUD Final Plan subject to the above conditions and to
any other conditions deemed necessary.
2. Recommend denial of the request, based on specific findings of fact.
3. Continue this item to a date specific, and provide the developer with direction on the
issues that have been discussed.
4. Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning staff recommends Alternative 1.
ACTION REQUIRED:
A motion and second to recommend approval of the Final PUD Plan subject to the listed
conditions.
l:\02files~02puds\fountain hills 2nd final\pc report.doc Page 5
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution #02-44
2. Reduced Copy of PUD Plans
l:\02files\02puds\fountain hills 2nd final\pc report.doc Page 6
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN
RESOLUTION 02-44
RESOLUTION APPROVING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN
TO BE KNOWN AS FOUNTAIN HILLS 2"0 ADDITION
MOTION BY: ZIESKA SECOND BY: PETERSEN
WHEREAS: Wensmann Realty, Inc. has submitted an application for a Planned Unit Development
Preliminary Plan to be known as Fountain Hills 2nd Addition; and
WHEREAS: The Prior Lake Planning Commission considered the proposed Planned Unit
Development Preliminary Plan at a public hearing on March 11, 2002; and
WHEREAS: Notice of the public hearing on said PUD Preliminary Plan has been duly published in
accordance with the applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and
WHEREAS,
The Planning Commission proceeded to hear all persons interested in this issue and
persons interested were afforded the opportunity to present their views and objections
related to the Fountain Hills 2"d Addition PUD Preliminary Plan; and
WHEREAS: The Prior Lake City Council considered the proposed PUD Preliminary Plan for Fountain
Hills 2"~ Addition on April 1, 2002; and
WHEREAS: The City Council finds the PUD Preliminary Plan consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
and the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS: The City Council finds the PUD Preliminary Plan is compatible with the stated purposes
and intent of the Section 1106 Planned Unit Developments of the Zoning Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA:
The above recitals are herein fully incorporated herein as set forth above.
It hereby adopts the following findings:
a) Greater utilization of new technologies in building design, materials, construction and land
development.
The developer has attempted to design the buildings so they fit the land, rather than force the
land to fit the building design. The row houses along the outer ring of the development
take advantage of the natural grade.
b) Higher standards of site and building design.
The density of this site is clustered on the west side of the site to avoid the wetland and the trees
on the east end of the site. The units have also been placed as far north as possible to
preserve the trees on the south boundary of the site. The utilization of private streets in
1:\02files\02subdivisions\02prelim platq~fountain hills 2nd\pud~es.doc PAGE l
16200 Ea§le Creek Ave. S.E., Drior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Dh. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (9S2) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
the townhouse portion of the development allows the preservation of the wetlands and
some of the slopes and trees on this site.
c) More efficient and effective use of streets, utilities, and public facilities to support high
quality land use development at a lesser cost.
Maintenance of private streets, including plowing and future repairs, is done by the homeowners
association. This reduces City costs in providing services to these homes.
d) Enhanced incorporation of recreational, public and open space components in the
development which may be made more useable and be more suitably located than would
otherwise be provided under conventional development procedures.
As proposed, the developer provides a trail around the wetland. This trail will connect to the
existing sidewalk on Fountain Hills Court and Fountain Hills Drive.
e) Provides a flexible approach to development which allows modifications to the strict
application of regulations within the various Use Districts that are in harmony with the
purpose and intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
The density and variety of housing units is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals to
provide a variety of housing styles.
0 Encourages a more creative and efficient use of/and.
The PUD allows the higher density areas to be clustered, and preserves open space.
g) Preserves and enhances desirable site characteristics including flora and fauna, scenic
views, screening and buffering, and access.
The townhouse units are sited to take advantage of the natural terrain.
h) Allows the development to operate in concert with a Redevelopment Plan in certain areas
of the City and to insure the redevelopment goals and objectives within the
Redevelopment District will be achieved.
This criteria is not applicable.
i) Provides for flexibility in design and construction of the development in cases where large
tracts of land are under single ownership or control and where the use(s) has the potential
to significantly affect adjacent or nearby properties.
The use of the PUD allows the clustering of the homes and the use of private streets.
j) Encourages the developer to convey property to the public, over and above required
dedications, by allowing a portion of the density to be transferred to other parts of the site.
There is no additional parkland dedication with this plan.
k) The design shall consider the whole of the project and shaft create a unified environment
within the boundaries of the project by insuring architectural compatibility of aft structures,
efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site
features, and efficient use and design of utilities.
The design creates a unified environment. The extension of the existing streets and provision of
trails and sidewalks allows for efficient movement of traffic. Revision of the ~andscaping
plan to meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance will also enhance this area.
I) The design of a PUD shall optimize compatibility between the project and surrounding
land uses, both existing and proposed and shaft minimize the potential adverse impacts of
the PUD on surrounding land uses and the potential adverse effects of the surrounding
land uses on the PUD.
The use of the PUD will allow the clustering of the townhouse units and provide a transition from
the commercial area on the west to the single family area on the east side of Pike Lake
Trail.
h\O2fiies\O2subdivisions\O2prelim plats\fountain hills 2nd\pudres.doc
PAGE2
If a project for which PUD treatment has been requested involves construction over a
period of time in two or more phases, the applicant shall demonstrate that each phase is
capable of addressing and meeting each of the criteria independent of the other phases.
The PUD will be completed in one phase.
n) Approval of a PUD may permit the placement of more than one building on a lot.
This is not applicable.
A PUD in a Residential Use District shall conform to the requirements of that Use District
unless modified by the following or other provisions of this Ordinance. 1) The tract of/and
for which a project is proposed shall have not less than 200 feet of frontage on a public
right-of-way; 2) No building shall be nearer than its building height to any property line
when the property abutting the subject property is in an "R-1" or "R-2" Use District; 3) No
building within the project shall be nearer to another building than ~ the sum of the
building heights of the two buildings, except for parking ramps which may be directly
connected to another building; and 4) Private roadways within the project site may not be
used in calculating required off-street parking spaces.
The modifications requested by the developer include the following:
· The use of private streets. Normally, a development of this type would require a
minimum right-of-way width of 50' and a 28' to 30' wide surface. The developer is
requesting a 28' wide private street. The additional 22' of right-of~way would be
accommodated by the use of easements adjacent to the private road. The use of
private streets in this case
· Reduced front yard setbacks on the private streets. The conventional setback
requirement is 30' from the right-of-way line. The developer is requesting a 22' front
yard setback, measured from the building face to the curb of the private street, and a
14' front yard setback, measured from the second-floor deck to the curb of the private
street.
· Reduced setbacks between buildings. The required separation between buildings
under the PUD provisions is ~ the sum of the heights of the buildings, or 35' in this
case. The developer is requesting a 25' separation between the buildings.
· Exterior building materials. The Zoning Ordinance normally requires Class I building
materials on buildings with more than 4 units. Class I materials primarily consist of
brick, marble, granite, textured cement stucco and glass. On buildings with 4 or fewer
dwelling units, vinyl siding is a Class I material.
l:\02files\O2subdivisions\O2prelim plats~fountain hills 2nd\pudres.doc
These modifications are permitted under the PUD provisions at the discretion of the
Council. The City Council found these modifications to be consistent with the goals and
intent of the PUD criteria in that they allowed the clustering of the townhouses to preserve
the natural terrain. The City Council also found the modification to the exterior materials
appropriate since it is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive PLan to provide a
variety of housing styles.
The Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan is hereby approved subiect to the following
conditions
a) The private streets must be designed so that the sum of the width of the outlot and the
adjacent easements is equal to 50 feet.
b) Extend sanitary sewer and water main to the south property boundary.
c) Provide a drainage easement and storm sewer pipe from the south side of the wetland on
the east side of the property to the south property line for the future use of the property to
the south.
PAGE 3
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
J)
k)
~)
m)
n)
o)
Provide a drainage and utility easement on Lot 1, Block 1, Fountain Hills Addition, for the
sanitary sewer pipe located within this lot.
Provide the information necessary to show how the drainage will work behind Unit ~4 to
achieve a 2% swale.
Provide retaining wall profiles and design by a registered engineer.
Revise the landscaping plan to include the required number of oversized trees.
Verify that the setback between the buildings and the wetland is 30' to the 100-year flood
elevation of the wetland.
Indicate whether signs will be provided for the townhouse development. If so, provide
sign elevations and greater detail on the location of the proposed monument signs.
Provide a lighting plan identifying the footcandles at the south property line that are a
result of the wall lighting on the south side of the units.
Provide a phasing plan for the project.
Provide an irrigation plan.
Provide street names for the private streets.
Ensure that the tie-ins to the existing 8" water main valve on Pike Lake Trail will be
acceptable for hook-ups and testing.
Proved a concrete entrance to the easterly entrance to the new sidewalk. The westerly
entrance will require a valley-gutter where needed.
Application for approval of a PUD Final Plan must be submitted within 90 days of the date of
approval of this resolution, or by July 1, 2002, unless written request for an extension of time is
approved by the City Council.
Passed and adopted this 1st day of April, 2002.
YES NO
Haugen X Haugen
Vacant Vacant
Gundlach Absent Gundlach Absent
Petersen X Petersen
Zieska X Zieska
{Seal}
Frank Boyles, City Manager
l:\02files\02subdivisions\02prelim plats\fountain hills 2nd\pudres.doc PAGE 4
J~
hJlJl
iII I
Itl }
IlliI
l I| JJ
0
0
J~
d
w
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
7A
REVIEW REQUEST TO VACATE THE DRAINAGE
AND UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON LOTS 21-
23, BLOCK 2, WENSMANN 1sT ADDITION (Case File
#02-049)
JANE KANSlER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
YES X NO-N/A
MAY 28, 2002
INTRODUCTION
Wensmann Realty, Inc. has filed an application to vacate the 5' wide drainage
and utility easements located on the common lot line between Lots 21 and 22,
Block 2, Wensmann 1`~ Addition, and on the common lot line between Lots 22
and 23, Block 2, Wensmann 1't Addition. The applicant is proposing to create
two larger lots out of the existing three lots, and to dedicate a new easement on
the common lot line. The existing easement must be vacated in order to allow
construction of new houses on the two lots.
As required by State Statute 462.356 Subd.2, the Planning Commission is
required to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the disposal or
acquisition of public lands as it relates to compliance with the Comprehensive
Plan.
Upon proper notification, State Statute 412.851 allows the Council to vacate
easement or right-of-way by resolution. The statute also states "no such
vacation shall be made unless it appears to be in the public interest to do so".
DISCUSSION
Wensmann 1" Addition was originally platted in 2000. As is the norm, drainage
and utility easements were dedicated on the common lot lines. The developer
has since received a request to combine these three lots into two for the
construction of two, larger single family dwellings. In order to facilitate this
construction, the drainage and utility easement on the common lot lines must be
vacated.
1:\02files\O2vacations\02-049 wensmann 1\02-49 pc Teport.doc
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
The Planning Commission must make two determinations. Does the vacation of
the existing easement comply with the Comprehensive Plan and is there a public
need or anticipated future need for the dedicated property?
Comprehensive Plan Review
The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically discuss utility easements, other
than as a function of ensuring access to public utilities. The vacation of this
easement is not inconsistent with any specific goal or objective of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Public Need
There are no utilities located within the existing easements. A new easement will
be dedicated on the new common lot line to accommodate drainage between the
lots. With the dedication of the new easement, there is no need to retain the
existing drainage and utility easements.
RECOMMENDATION
There is no need for the retention of the existing easements once the lots are
combined and the new easement is dedicated. The Planning staff therefore
recommends approval of this request, subject to the condition that the
documents dedicating the new easement be recorded prior to recording the
resolution vacating the existing easements.
ALTERNATIVES:
Recommend the City Council approve the proposed vacation of the
easement as presented or with changes recommended by the
Commission.
Continue the discussion to a date and time certain to allow the staff to
provide additional information specifically requested by the Planning
Commission.
Based upon expressed findings of fact, recommend the City Council deny
part or all of the applications based upon inconsistency of the proposal
with specific regulations of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and/or
specific policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends Alternative #1.
]:\02files\O2vacations\02-049 wensmann 1 \02-49 pc reporLdoc
ACTION REQUIRED:
Motion and second to recommend the City Council approve the vacation of the
easement subject to the listed condition.
l:\02files\O2vacafions\02-049 wensmann 1\02-49 pc report.doc 3
Description
Sketch
for: WENSMANN
LINE OF LOI' 23, BLK. 2,
WENSMANN 1ST ADDITION
150.00
REALTY, INC.
EL
PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT~.
1 Inch = 60 Feet
THIS SKETCH DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OF ANY
ENCROACHMENTS FROM OR ONTO THE HEREON DESCRIBED LAND, EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR
UNRECORDED EASEMENTS WHICH AFFECT SAID LAND OR ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO SAID LAND.
~ (765) 785-1~0 FAX:785-1883
-10208850~.DWGJ OJ~ .... ~HEET 1 OF 5 SHEETS 102088 02 - 145
Description
Sketch for: WENSMANN
~ N LINE OF LO] 23, BLK, 2,
o
REALTY, INC.
W LINE OF LOT 22, EILK 2,
~,I:NSMANN 1ST ADDITION~--
L~L.O
23 : I, ..,,,
· PROPOSED DRAINAGE AND '
I~ h' UTIUTY EASE~JENT Q ~
I '~ L,J
.o~ / I ~ L,_
~'~ ! I -~ m,
1 Inch = 60 Feet
PROPOSED EAS£MENT FOR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PURPOSF~g
A 10.00 foot wide easement for drainage and utility purposes lying over. under and across all
that port of Lot 22, Black 2, WENSMANN TST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat
[hereof, Scott County, Minnesota, the centefllne of said easement is described es tallows:
Commencing et the intersection of the north line of Lot 23, Block 2, s~id WENSMANN 1ST
AODITION and the westerly right of way line of Jeffers Pass os delineated and dedicated on
sold WENSMANN 1ST ADDITION; thence on an assumed bearing of South OD degrees 40
minutes 32 seconds East, along sold wes[aMy right of way line, o distance of 129.00 feet, to
the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence South 89 degrees lg
minutes 28 seconds West, a distance o~ 150.00 feet, to the west llne of sold Lot 22 0nd
there terminating.
THIS SKETCH DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OF ANY
ENCROACHMENTS FROM OR ONTO THE HEREON DESCRIBED LAND. EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR
UNRECORDED EASEMENTS WHICH AFFECT SAID LAND OR ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO SAID LAND.
WE HEREBY CER3FY..T~/EI~NSMANN REALTY, INC, THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN OR REPORT WAS
PREPARED BY ME,~ UN~ER MY DIRECT BUPERVtS[O~N, AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LAND
SURVEYCR UNDER ~HE LA~(~F THE STATE OF~N,~SOTA, DATED THiS 6TH DAY OF MAy, 2002.
PIONEER
Bnglneel'ing
102088501.DWGI JJS , ,
~ohn C. Lorson, Land Surve r
~Minnesoto License No. 1982~0
2~22 Enterprise Drive
Mendoto Heights, MN 55120
(850 681--1914 FAX:68t-9~B8
625 Highwo~ 10 NE
(763) 783-1880 FA~783--tB83
SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEETS 102088 02 - 145~
Description
Sketch for: WENSMANN
' NSg'lg'28"E 150.00
i PARCEL
~ '--~PROPOSED DRAINAGE UTILITY EASEMENT
1121 0.4899 ocres
PARCEL B
oo
REAETY, INC.
THIS SKETCH DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OF ANY
ENCROACHMENTS FROM OR ONTO THE HEREON DESCRIBED LAND, EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR
UNRECORDED EASEMENTS WHICH AFFECT SA~D LAND OR ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO SAID LAND
WE HEREOY CERTIFY I'O WENSMANN REALLY, iNC THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN OR REPORT WAS
PREPARED BY ME, OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, AND 1HAT I AM A DULY LICENSEO LAND
SURVEYOR UNDER T~HC~_AW~ OF THE STATE OF/RC~4~';OTA, DATED mis 6TH DAY OF MAY, 2002.
S~ED:/--. /Z~NEER ENOINEERI~G,//P:~
102088501.DWG1 ,JJS SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETS 102088 02 - 145~4~
/
Description
W LINE OF' LOT 22, BLK. 2,
WENSMANN 1ST ADDITION ---~_
Sketch
N LiNE OF LOT 23, BLK, 2,
/~ WENSMANN 1ST ADDITION
for: WENSMANN REALTY, INC.
1 Inch = 60 Feet
pROPOSED £AS£MENT FOR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PURPOSES
A 10.OO foot wide easement for dreiboge and utility purposes I~ing over, under and across ali
that part of Lot 22, Block 2, W[NSMANN IST ADDITION, according to the recorded plot
thereof, Scott County, Mibnesoto, the centeHine of sold easement is described ~35 follows:
Commencing at the intersection of the north line of Lot 23. Block 2, sa~d W[NSMANN 1ST
ADDITION and the westerly right of way line of Jeffers Pass os dellneoted and dedicated on
sold WENSMANN 1ST ADDt310N; thence on on assumed bearing of South O0 degrees 40
minutes 32 seconds East. along sold westerly right of way line, o distance of 12g,00 feet, to
the point of beginning of [he centerline to be described; thence South 89 degrees lg
minutes 28 seconds West. a distance of 150.00 feet, to the west line of said Lot 22 end
there terminoUng.
THIS SKETCH DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXtSTENCE OF ANY
ENCROACHMENTS FROM OR ONTO THE HEREON DESCRIBED LAND. EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR
UNRECORDED EASEMENTS WHICH AFFECT SAID LAND OR ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO SAID LAND.
WE HEREBY CER31FY ~NSMANN REALTY. INC. THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN OR REPORT WAS
PREPARED BY ME,~R UNI)ER MY DIRECT SUPERV~[OJ~, AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LAND
SURVEYOR UNDER I~HE LA~VS~F THE STATE 0F"~NN,~SOTA, DATED THIS 6TH DAY OF MAY, 2002.
/~4.olhn C. Lorson. Land Surveyor
nnesota License No. 1982~ 24-22 Enterprise Drive
FAX: 681-g488
102088501.DWG] JJS SHEET 2 OF 5 SHEETS 102088 02 - 145~
/
Description
Sketch for: WENSMANN
' Nsg"19'28"E 1.50.00
0
0
PARCEL A'-"
19,350 SF
,~ '~'
S8~'I 9'28"W_ _15_0=0_0
'--~L~'_P~O~'O~'D DRAINAGE
OT~LI1 T EASEMENT
INAGE & UTILITY
EASEMEN~ fo BE VACATED
2L34; SF
0.4899 ocres
PARCEL B
REALTY, INC.
THIS SKETCH DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OF ANY
ENCROADHMEN'P5 FROM OR ONTO THE HEREON DESCRIBED LAND. EASEMENTS OF RECORO OR
UNRECORDED EASEMENTS WHICH AFFECT SAID LAND OR ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO SAID LANO.
WE HEREI3Y CERTIFy ]0 WENSMANN REALLY. iNC THAT THIS SURVEY. PLAN OR REPORT WAS
PREPARED BY ME, OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LAND
SURVEYOR UNDER T~-,,~AW/~ OF THE STATE O~TA, DATED ~1S 6TH DAY OF MAY. 2002.
II
, ~ Minnesoto License No. 19828 I/ ·
j~ (765) 785-1~0 FAX:785-18B5