Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-12-98REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, October 12, 1998 6:30 p.m. 2. 3. 4. Call Meeting to Order: Roll Call: Approval of Minutes: Public Hearings: A. Cases #98-136 and #98-137 Pat Hayes is requesting a 10 foot variance to permit a rear yard setback 15 feet rather than the required setback of 25 feet; and a 4.5 percent foot variance to permit impervious surface coverage of 34.5 percent instead of the maximum allowed impervious surface coverage of 30 percent; #98-137 requesting a vacation of a portion of drainage and utility easements adjacent to Lots 43 and 44, C.O. Harmen's Maple Park Shore Acres. 5. Old Business: A. Case #98-019 Consider an official map for a ring road in the southeast comer of Highway 13, from Franklin Trail to Tower Street. 6. New Business: 7. Announcements and Correspondence: 8. Adjournment: 16200 ~gr~ ~ree~ ~ve~'~i ~'rior La~e, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 28, 1998 1. Call to Order: The September 28, 1998, Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman Stamson at 6:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Cramer. Criego and Vonhof, Planning Director Don Rye, Planning Coordinator ~ and Planner Jenni Tovar. 2. Roll Call: . "~: Kuykendall Present ~.47 .... · 3. Approval of Minutes: ......... ========================= ........ }" The Minutes ~om the Se 1998 Pl~g Co~ion meeting were approved as presented. 4. A. Case to the City of Prior and a zone change request for the property Business Park. dated September 28, the City Planner. An aerial photo depicted the location of ~roposed zoning areas was shown. A history of given. Topography was reviewed. The (MUSA) was reviewed. Residential-High Density including uses and adjacent uses. Retail Shopping - Communit, designation was described including types of uses and consistency with high traffic uses. The Planning staff finds the proposed C-CC designation consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed B-3 district is also consistent with this designation. The stafftherefore recommends approval of this request. The staff also finds the proposed R-HD designation and the proposed R-3 district are premature at this time. This amendment and rezoning should not occur until the entire quarter section is restudied. 1:\98files\98plcomm\pcminhnm092898.doe 1 Two letters were received from Larry Lundmark and James Boerhave one in favor-and one opposed to the proposal. Questions from Commissioners: Cramer: Questioned the Vierling property in Agricultural preserves. :!iii::ii::ii~ Rye explained the property located on County Roads 21 and 42 is not in.::~"~al preserve. The Vierlings own property north of County Road 42, no~::i~ east of the site Terry Wensmann, of Wensmarm Homes said they did ~¢~:a prgposal 5 years ago'i:~ have tried unsuccessfully to market as an industrial p~ Mr. VC~mann said theyi::~e Criego: Why 7 acres R-HD versus being all business? .... ~::iii?[i??~i::::~ Herb Wensmann of Wensmann Homes r~:~0rt of the pro~::'has natural amemt~es, woods, topography and Wensmarm also responded to the letter from Mr. Lundmark ~t~lg~g 'g:~g~d senior housing which will alleviate any concerns ~::gg~ii::i::i~enior ap~nts on a:~F~stigious site. Michael Gresser, statec~:~::hmily ~.~iness is c~m~tion, concrete and masonry currently located in ~ and w~' like a new .~iion. Gresser feels this site is ideal and presented a phd~':~i~ir e~gi::::~t~,?:~ically their use needs to be zoned build!ng. Thi~..:~i~:.:gse woul~[::~i::~0r a corporate campus facility. They have training and BBQ s., ~iii~ii!~gnty R~!ig~...g~l has good access. Gressers would like to do some~::ihat com~ts the ~;pment along County Road 42 with a convenience stom ii :hnk and gas sta~i!!i~ The 1~ as drawn shows a frontage road which was tamed d~i~i~he County. Gr~er said they are interested in a right turn only access. This will i~ traffic. The..~posed facility is an office facility facing County Road 42. The plan'~iii~iii~evelop ~::~:'i.3 acres into a mirrored pond and to expand the wetland. Gresser feei~i~!?:Ci~i~ benefit from more commercial development but they are not seeking financ~:~!i~:~tance t~om the City. Creigo: What would be in the yard? Gresser: Storage racks with scaffolding, heavy equipment, forklffis, screens for finishing concrete. Our current yard is an acre, with 25% enclosed storage and half of that is finished and heated masonry buildings. From the outside of the proposed building, you would not see what is in the inside. It would be 10-16 feet or higher, masonry wall to enclose the yard. The appearance of the yard would be that of a large building. There would be heated and cold storage buildings. 1:\98 files\98plcomm\pcminhrtn092898.doc Stamson: What you are proposing is an office with storage. No retail? Gresser: Yes. Office and storage with a possible leased tenant at our site. The property to the east will be retail. We will develop it or would sell it for development. Kuykendall: Is that a building along the west property line? What type? Gresser: Yes, an out building. Kuykendall: To staff- The property to the west is zoned? Kansier: Agricultural Greaser: Yard and office are located on the highest would not look down in to the site. The ~ee Kuykendall: Frontage Road? Gresser: Right in only. Exit along Pike project would still be viable with the only ' Road 42. The Lake~rail. Stamson: Isn't this use Kansier: Commercial or conducting we willbe subdivision or site plan application. spnng. Gresser is the largest concrete This is a use that is well designed. to answer questions regarding comparable real estate informatior Lakeville's Office Park has land for free with no assessments. It is difficult New Heat and Glow headquarters will be there. They are for free. They want to expand their campus because of the tax benefits. As a developer, we get one chance and that is it. Savage: 20 acres sold for $1.65 per acre. 60,000 sq. foot building. $1.30 sq. foot for improvements, the city paid. Land is $.35 a sq. foot. Herb paid more than this 5 years ago. Bumsville is the same. The cost is less than $1.00 sq. foot, we cannot compete with neighboring communities. Chair Stamson read the hearing procedures. l:\98files\98plcomm\pcminh-nn092898.doc 3 Ed Vierling, 14310 Pike Lake Trail, stated his concern regarding R-HD. Vierling does not want a gas station or fast food on comer. Want to keep on fanning. It is hard to farm with the traffic. Because commercial will be at another meeting, I'll wait for that. Senior housing is O.K. We need it in this town, not for young people. Kevin Lilland, Maple Hills Addition: Letter from Boerhave states proposal is detrimental to value. Concern over R-HD apartments. We came from apartments and.~g~d to the woods, our concem is the Commercial district to Residential district now our concern is the other side. We want to keep it as nice as possi!~[iand keep the traffic down. Keep traffic from apartments down. As Vierling s~i~i~Ids on the corner would not be good. The residential area on the East of Pi~li~ake 'i~F~i~ o f concern ..... Rick Weidner, Maple Hills, questioned how many residential ~ts? .... Herb Wensmann said it would be 80 units. ':?!?~:!~i}ii?iiiiii~iii:::~ Dan Klamm, 4130 140th Street NE, questioned the Lightin~::ii~nance. Klamm stated he does not want big lighted signs or billet,.: Against fast ~i~:~:[~e area. No problem with senior housing. ~:~:~:: ....::::~,~:~:~,~:~,~:~:~ ........ Kuykendall: Where do you live relative to::~ ~i';~:??iii~amm responded exactly Herb Wensmann comn~d traffi~iii~om a seni~::~co0p will be low. For residential, it would generate the l~::::hmount o.~iffic Kewn Ldland, 4560 Emg~iii~i~'i"~i~'~l ff approved for R-HD, is there any way it could be ch~g~ in the f~. Stam.~g~a:: We are lo~$.at a zo~!::~tiange, no guarantee it would be senior housing. ~iigddressed the h~ng: Gas station is local, no big name. There would be little lightifi~i~ signage. O~ii~rst choice is a family owned company who have built in White B~i~wnship¢~ would place architectural covenants. Herb Wensm~iii~i'ained the co-op is owner occupied, not rental. We want to maintain a high architec~i quality and covenants. Dan Klamm, 4130 140th Street NE, questioned the hours of operation for commercial property? Stamson: Responded there was no restriction of time on land use. Some specific types of businesses have hour regulations. The public heating closed. 1:\98files\98plcormn\pcmin\nm092898.doc 4 Comments from the Commissioners: Vonhof: · Remembers proposal 5 years ago, the idea of a business park was to attract high quality development. Almost the exact type of development as Gresser is proposing. Agree with staff report, the change to commercial for 33 acres. ~ R- HD is premature until we know what the compatible land uses are. Kuykendall: · Feels the same. More staff review of why R-HD is the area surrounding it is B-P. It is spot zoning. make some decision of what is appropriate. Comprehensive Amendment in 1995, there County Road 42, how much property to be desi B-P on County Road 42 in terms of acreage market study had said at the time. · Concerns of public can be addressed in the future as Supports zone change and Altemativ~i~i~:~:~.~. Rye pointed out standards for lighting Ue~.n r~i~..~ercial zoning. Billboards are not permitted in the City. Stamson: · Showroom office i zone these commercial was in the City. Is there another said the Retail is specific, are proposing does offer retail and a for the 33 acres. It is appropriate to re-zone the Commissioners. Asked staffto read B-3 uses. the t Concurs with staff to rezone to B-3. It is ~ would like. Need to look at 160 acres together. Cramer: · Very familiar with the area. Supports change to C-CC. County Road 42 will be the major retail commercial corridor of the southern metropolitan area. This is a great opportunity. · Opposed R-HD because of the proposal to extend County Road 21 to bypass. May be creating a single area zoned R-I-ID, when the entire area north of County Road 42 is guided for plenty orR-HD. Agrees with staffrecommendation of that. l:\95files\98plcomm\pcmin~aa092898.doe 5 · Agree to change the Comprehensive Plan to Community Commercial and the zoning to be B:3 but oppose the zoning changes to make it a residential area. MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT TO DESIGNATE APPROXIMATELY 33 ACRES COMMUNITY RETAIL SHOPPING. Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED ..... MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO RECO~iii~eROVAL'":'::: ':'::' OF THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST FROM C-1 AND BUSINES~i!~ ~mCT TO Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.~? .:~,~,~:~ .... MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY CRIEGO;~ii~ii~O~ DENYING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE TO THE 7.35 A~Sii~0 A'~SIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY. Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTI(5~ii~D. :!~i::~i}!~!i~!ii:,~ A. Case 98-109 - Re{~ih!~i:~::ii]:~.varianc~!~!requested by Sandy Silfverston Planner Jenni Tovar.::~nted th~.~ffreport, d4i~?~eptember 28, 1998. Resolutions are consistent with:~l~g..C~::::~::i[~endation from the September 14, MOTiO~Vii':~, SE~:~,~:g~ VON~OF, TO ~PROVE RESOLUTION 98- 23PC.~PROVING':~i~ ~ FOOT':~ANCE TO PERMIT A 19.6 FOOT FRONT Y~iSETBACK INg~ Ogii~HE REQUIRED 25 FOOT FRONT YARD S:I~K AND 22.7 F~T VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 62.3 FOOT SETBACK FRO~::*~:CEN'rE~..........,....... --:,.:.:.,. OF A COtn,~TY ROAD INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 85 FOOT'i~!'''~TERL~:SETBACK Vote taken s~gm~'ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY CRAMER, SECOND BY VONHOF, DENYING A 0.2 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 84.8 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE CENTERLINE OF A COUNTY ROAD INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 85 FOOT CENTERLINE SETBACK. Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. B. Case 98-116 - Resolution for variance requested by Holiday Station Stores l:\98files\98plcomm\pcminkmn092898.doc 6 Plarmer'Jenni Tovar presented staff report dated September 28, 1998. Resolution is consistent with Planning Commission direction from the September 14, 1998 meeting. MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY KUYKENDALL, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98o27PC APPROVING A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FROM 24 TO 19 FOR CONVENIENCE STORE~WASH. Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. A. Case 98~124 - Public meeting to consider the vaeat[0....~i::i~::~rtion and utility easements adjacent to Lot 2, Block 2,.~erf~0nt Passage Busi~::::~ .... Planner Jermi Tovar presented the Planning Report dated:~t~ber 28, 1998 on file in Cons~denng the proposed vacatmn ~s con~:.~he Compre~s~ve Plan and wdl not eliminate a public need staffrecommi~!~!s ai~::~Ihe vag~iion of the drainage Kuykendall questioned if O~i~i~i~ihssured e~ments wiii be granted. Tovar said the property owner is EDA~i~cumen~i~ave been'~d and just have to be signed and ADOPTING RESOLUTION UTILITY 1 AND 2, BLOCK 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION. Vote taken signified ayes by ail. MOTION CARRIED. A. Case 98-125 ~ Public meeting to consider the vacation of a portion of Erie Avenue and the platted alley right-of-way located adjacent to Blocks 4 and 5, in the original plat of Prior Lake. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated September 28, 1998 on file in the office of the City Planner. The portions of the right-of-way (R-O-W) is l:~98filesX98plcomm\pcmin~mO92898.doc 7 adjacent to City property. The alley will be used for parking, however, some of the building will be located on the R-O-W. There is no access to County Road 21, traffic is not an issue. This expands the Comprehensive Plan as far as learning activities. Public need is not an issue as there is no direct access to County Road 21. There is a fiber optics line. The phone company wants an easement for future maintenance of the line. The proposed vacation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is ini==i~:=.public interest. On this basis, the staff recommends approvalof the vacation ....... of.:~hg:'~l~ti~of-way? ~::~'"::' subject to the condition a 10' wide utility easement is maintained ove~l~,alley fight-of- way. Questions by Commissioners: .... ~i::i?:~::::,. ~::ili?:i~: ======?;?=?====?=== .... Is this after the fact? Kansier noted the timing requi~{~=i:i; obta~l~gal descfiption~!ii~d to F~ctionally, it is the sine use. R-O-W E~g~ easements. N~::~g~in use. ~LEY PLATTED m ~:'~;:':P~G~i::g~ OmGm~ TO~. Dlrec~e smd ~e E~is holding a workshop on Wednesday at 5:30 to consider a proposal F6~[~to~::~aevelopment pl~. ~e EDA iffitially considered a brochure for m~keting p'~S.::~8:"aumofized expen~es of approximately $5,000. As pm of me cost, a do~to~evelopment pl~ was p~ of the pl~. Rather ~ do these s~mely, they~:~i]l consider the entire pl~. Rye also updated that the City Council will hold public hearing on the draft zoning ordinance. Meeting starts at 7:30 p.m. then public hearing. It will be on cable. 8. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 7:42 p.m. l:\98files\98plcomm\pcmin~nn092898.doc 8 Donald Rye Director of Planning l:\98files\98plcomm\pcminXnm092898.doc 9 PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: SITE: PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: 4A CONSIDER A REAR YARD SETBACK VARIANCE, IMPERVIOUS SURFACE VARIANCE AND EASEMENT VACATION FOR PAT HAYES, Case File #98-136 PART OF LOTS 43 AND 44, C.O. HENNEN'S MAPLE PARK SHORE ACRES JENNI TOVAR, PLANNER JANE KANSlER, PLANNING COORDINATOR YES X NO OCTOBER 12, 1998 INTRODUCTION: The Planning Department received a variance application from Pat Hayes who is proposing to construct a single family dwelling with attached garage and deck. The proposed structure will be located 15 feet from the rear lot line, instead of the required setback of 25 feet and the proposed impervious surface will be 34.5% rather than the maximum permitted of 30%. The structure is also located 5 feet over an existing 10 foot wide easement, for which a vacation of the easement is being requested. DISCUSSION: The lot is a result of an administrative subdivision approved in 1995. Lots 43 and 44 were platted as 50 foot wide and 100 feet deep facing north/south. The administrative subdivision reconfigured the lots perpendicular to the existing lots, resulting in a lot 75 feet wide and 100 feet deep, facing eastJwest. Variances to lot area and lot width were granted as part of the administrative subdivision. Patrick Hayes and Delores Hayes were the applicants for this request. There were no conditions relating to future variances being granted as part of the approval. The lot is 7,500 square feet. The legal building envelope is 60 feet by 50 feet (3,000 sq. feet). The maximum permitted impervious surface is 2,250 square feet. Considering the driveway is 18 feet wide and 25 feet long (450 sq, feet), 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake~ Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER the maximum building pad is 1,550 sq. feet. The DNR has not commented on this request. The easements were granted by the applicant in 1995 as part of the administrative subdivision. There are no utilities located within the easement, however, the easement does serve a public purpose for providing space to achieve drainage, which will be more important once the house is constructed. In addition, the lot is wooded. The tree preservation ordinance allows for a maximum removal of 25% of the total caliper inches. There are 224 caliper inches on the lot, with 122 inches to be removed. The replacement ratio is ~:1 resulting in 33 caliper inches to be replaced. VARIANCE HARDSHIP STANDARDS 1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship with respect to the property. This criteria goes to whether reasonable use can be made of the property if the Ordinance is literally enfomed. Considering the lot is vacant and the legal building envelope is 3,000 sq. feet and 2,550 sq. feet of impervious surface is allowed, reasonable use can exist on the property with a smaller house located out of the easement. 2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique to the property. There are unique circumstances with respect to the property. The lot is a substandard lot and the topography is unusual, with a hill located on the north side of the property,. However, alternatives exist on the property for a smaller building and the structure could be designed with a platform, rather than a deck, thus eliminating the need for a rear yard setback variance. 3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the result of actions of persons presently having an interest in the property. The hardship is the result of the property owner. The lots were reconflgured in 1995 by the applicant. The house can be relocated and reduced in size to meet the setbacks and to be located out of the easement. 4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest. The intent of a the rear yard setback is to allow separation between structures. The intent of impervious surface is to control the amount of run- L:\98FILES\98VAR\98-136\98-136PC,DOC Page 2 off from proper[ies. The intent of the ordinance cannot be preserved in granting of the variances. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has concluded the variance and vacation requests do not meet all four hardship criteria. The house could be redesigned to meet setbacks and located out of the easement. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Deny the application because the Planning Commission finds a lack of demonstrated hardship under the zoning code criteria and a public need of the easement. A motion and second adopting the attached Resolution #98- 31PC and 98-32PC. 2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose. 3. Approve the variances requested by the applicant, or approve any variances the Planning Commission deems appropriate in the circumstances. Direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolutions. ACTION REQUIRED: Motion and second adopting Resolution 98-31PC and 98~32PC. L:\98FILES\98VAR\98-t 36\98-136PC.DOC Page 3 RESOLUTION 98-31PC A RESOLUTION DENYING A 10 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 15 FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT SETBACK AND A 4.5% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE OF 34.5 PERCENT RATHER THAN THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED OF 30 PERCENT BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. Patrick Hayes has applied for variances from the Zoning Ordinance in order to permit the construction of a single family home on property located in the R-1 (Suburban Residential) District and SD (Shoreland District) at the following location, to wit; That part of Lots 43 and 44 C.O. Hennen's Maple Park Shore Acres according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, which lies northerly of a line connecting a point in the westerly line of said Lot 43 distant 75.00 feet southerly of the northwest comer thereof with a point in the easterly line of said Lot 44 distant 75.00 feet southerly of the northeast comer thereof. 1. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in Case #98-136 and held heatings thereon on October 12, 1998. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variances upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variances on the Comprehensive Plan. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, it is possible to use the subject property in such a way that the proposed structure, without the granting of the variances, will not be contrary to the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. The legal building envelope for the lot is approximately 3,000 square feet. The applicant has control over the proposed location of the house and layout. Reasonable use of the property exists within the legal building envelope. l:\98files\98var\98-136~re9831 pc.doc 1 16200 Ea§le Creek Ave. S.E., Drior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Dh. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447424S AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER The granting of the variances are not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variances will serve merely as a convenience to the apphcant, and is not necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship. The factors listed above allow for an alternative house design and layout and alternative location to be permitted without the variance. 6. The contents of Planning Case 98-136 are hereby entered into and made a part of the public record and the record of decision for this case. CONCLUSION Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby denies the following variances, as shown in attached Exhibit A (survey) for proposed single family dwelling; 1. A 15 foot variance to permit a I0 foot rear yard setback instead of the required 25 foot setback; and 2. A 4.5% variance to permit impervious surface coverage of 34.5% rather than the maximum permitted of 30%. Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on October 12, 1998. ATTEST: Anthony Stamson, Chair Donald R. Rye, Planning Director l:~Sfiles'O 8var\98-136'u'e9831 pc.doc 2 RESOLUTION 98-032PC RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON LOTS 43 AND 44, C.O. HENNEN'S MAPLE PARK SHORE ACRES MOTION BY: SECOND BY: WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of Prior Lake has considered the vacation of drainage and utility easements on the property located in Lots 43 and 44, C.O. Hennen's Maple Park Shore Acres; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that there is a public need for the drainage and utility easements. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, recommends to the City Council that the previously dedicated drainage and utility easements legally described as the southerly 5 feet of the northerly 10 feet of lots 43 an 44, C.O. Hennen's Maple Park Shore Acres, Scott County, MN. not be vacated as a public need for the easement exists. Passed and adopted this 12th day of October, 1998. ATTEST: Anthony Stamson, Chair Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator L:\98FILES\98VAR\98-136\RES98032.DOC Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER · SITE LOCATION ~ /V 172 SEC. 35 ~ THE; .~5~ - Oc~-O easterly line of said Lot 44 distaht 75.00 in the of the northeast COrner thereof, feet Southerly EXHIBIT A SURVEy B /~100.00 -~-~ QUAKER BENCHMARK Sanitary Sewer invert in QSacker Trail 45 more or less SWly of the SW COrner of Parcel B. Elevation 933.00 NGVD 1929 Note: Tree locations and elevations primarily on Parcel A Were added to this drawing the 10th day of April, 1997. ADMINISTRATivE SUBDIVISION Prepared for Impervious Surface Calculations (To be Submitted with Building Permit Application) For An P~ope~ies Loc~ed in t~e Shore~and ~. is~ricl · The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted Property Address ~7'- /~7)/,~--.~ ~ '~: -]1~-~/5o~ LENGTH WIDTH SQ. FEET HOUSE x = X ATTACHED GARAGE TOTAL PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE...: .................. Z / _~ DETACHED BLDGS x (Garage/Shed) x TOTAL DETACHED BUILDINGS ....................... DRiVEWAY/PAVED AREAS (Driveway-paved or not) (Sidewalk/Parking Areas) TOTAL PAVED AREAS ......................................... PATIOS/PORCHES/DECKS (Olin Decks ¼" min. opening bee,,,'een boards, with a pervious surface below, ~r~ not considered to be impervious) TOTAL DECKS...: .................................................... OTHER TOTAL OTHER ....................................................... TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE UNDER/OVER//~. _ . Company_S_ ~m',C//~l/~' ~4A/;O ~g6q~/~3///~ Phone # ~/-t/~- in the Westerly line of said erly of the northwest Lot 43 distant easterly line of said Lot 44 distant 75.00 feet the northeast COrner th of. BUILDING EN , OpE 25' PARCEl. QUAKER TRAIL NOTE: R'~L:S. .0 7095 BENCHMARK Sanitary Sewer invert in Quacker Trail 45 more or less SWly of the SW COrner of Parcel B. Elevation 933.00 NGVD 1929 Note: Tree locations Primarily on Pa added to this d 10th day of Apr ~----~Prepared fo PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: PRESENTER: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: 5A CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN OFFICIAL MAP FOR THE RING ROAD BETVVEEN FRANKLIN TRAIL AND TORONTO AVENUE JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR X YES NO-N/A OCTOBER 12, 1998 INTRODUCTION: The City of Prior Lake has, for several years, anticipated the construction of a ring road between Franklin Trail and Toronto Avenue. This road is shown on the Transportation Map in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The recent construction of the Park Nicollet Clinic and the changes to the access points on Highway 13 has facilitated the need for this road. In order to better plan for this road, the City staff has proposed an official map for the right-of-way. An Official Map is an ordinance in map form adopted by the City that conclusively shows the location and width of proposed streets or future public land and facilities. The requirements for an Official Map are identified in the State Statutes (see attached). The purpose of an Official Map is to prevent private development form encroaching on sites for proposed public improvements. The adoption of an Official Map does not give the City any right, title or interest in areas identified for public purposes, but it does authorize the City to acquire such interests without paying compensation for buildings or structures erected in such areas without a permit or in violation of the conditions of an approved permit. The Official Map also governs the issuance of building permits in that it is not required to issue a permit for a structure within the public area defined by an official map. The statute also provides a property owner with an appeal process. ANALYSIS: The purpose of the proposed ring road is to provide access to the commemial properties on the southwest side of Highway 13, and to reroute that traffic from Highway 13 to a local street. In the past year, the Planning Commission reviewed several proposed alignments which would accomplish this by directing traffic from Franklin Trail to Toronto Avenue, and provides access to the properties adjacent to Highway 13 and the properties to the south. The alignment ultimately suggested by the Planning Commission is shown on the attached survey. This alignment has the least impact on existing development. :\9 fil \98 ub'ec\98:_0 \9 019p . oc P ge 1 16200 l~a~e~,re[~ ~ve. $.~, [~riorC~e, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (61~ 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER .ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend the Council approve the Official Map as proposed, or with changes specified by the Planning Commission. 2. Recommend the Council deny the proposed Official Map. 3. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose. ACTION REQUIRED: The Planning staff recommends Alternative #1. The Official Map provides for the alignment of the future road, and allows the City and the adjacent property owners to plan development consistent with this road alignment. A motion and second recommending approval of the Official Map is appropriate. REPORT ATTACHMENTS: 1. State Statute 2. Centerline Survey l:\98flles\98subjec\98-019\98019pc4,doc Page 2 · OUTLOT :RYSTAL LAKE 'D'IE POND ATHLETIC COMPLEX ORDERLY AN!~ i/ HOUSING. RIiDEV~LOP.M~-NT, pI.,A~NNI~G, ZO~NII~G surface areas necessary for mined undergzound space development pursuant to sections 469.135 to 469.1 ~ 1. toge~er wi~ ~ek es~a~ed cos~, ~e jus~fic~aon for e~ch ~prove- ment. ~e impact ~[ such ~provemenm will h~ve on ~e cu~n~ ope~g expe~e or' mu~cip~. ~d such other info~a~on on c~pi~ ~provemenm as may be peahens. Subd. 10. Offici~ map. "Offici~ m~p" me~s ~ m~p ~dop~ed in acco~mce with sec- ~on ~2.S~9 which may show e~s~ng ~d proposed fum~ s~eem, roa~, ~d ~ghw~ys of ~e mu~cipalky md count, ~e ~ needed for wide~ng of exisang s~ee~, roa~. and highways of ~e municip~iw ~d county, exis~ng ~d proposed ~r space ~d subsurface ~re~ necess~ for m~ned unde~ound space development pursuan~ ~o sections 469.135 469.141. ~d exisfin~ and ~mre coun~ stole aid highways ~d sm~e ~ ~ghway ~ha- o~-w~y. An offici~ map may ~so show ~e lock,on of existing ~d furore public la~d ~d f~cilides wi~in ~e municip~lky. In coundes in ~e me~opolk~ ~ea ~s defined in section 4~3.13 I, official maps may t~r ~ period of up ~o five ye~ designate ~e bound~es of ~se~ed ~or pu~oses of soil conse~don, w~ter supply conse~ation, flood comro[ and sur- face water d~inage ~d remov~ including ~ppropH~e regul~[ions procec~ng such ~g~ns~ encroachmen~ by buildings, o~er physical stmcmrei or ~cihdes. S ubd. l l. Governin8 body. "Govemin~ body" in the c~se or' cities means the council by whatever name ~own. ~nd in ~e c~e og ~ ~own. me~s the town bo~d. Subd. 12. Subdivision. "Subdivision" means [he sepal(on of ~ are~. p~ce[, or of l~d under singl~ owneahip into two or more purcels. ~cts, Io~. or long-te~ le~ehold inte~s~s where ~e c~ation o~ the le~ehold in[e~st necessitates ~e c~adon of street, roa~. or alleys, for residenti~, commercial, indus~ul, or o~her use or any combination · e~of. except those sepmdons: ~a) ~ere al ~e re~uhing p~els, wacts, lorn. or interests will be 20 acres or I~ger in size ~d 500 ~eet in width for residential ~es and five ac~s or l~er in size ~r commercial ~d indus~al uses: (bi Crea~ng cemete~ lorn; (cl Resul6ng ~om cou~ orden, or ~e adjus~em o~ a lot line by the reloca~on of a com- mon boundau. Subd. 13. Pla~ "Plat" means ~e drawing or map of a subdivision prepped for filing of record punuant to chapter 505 ~d containing all elemen~ and requiremems set foah in ap- plicable local regulations adopte~ pursuant m section ~62.358 and chapter 505. Subd. 1~. Subdiv~ion regulation. "Subdivision regulation" means an ordinance adopted pu~uant to section 462.358 ~guladng ~e subdivision of land. Subd. 15. Official control, "O~cial con=ols" or "con~Is" means ordinances and regulations which con~rol ~he physical development of a city. county or town or any ~e~of including air space and subsurface a~ necess~ for mined under~ound space de- velopment pu~uanc to sections ~9.13~ to ~69.14I, or ~y detal thereof ~d implement ~e gene~ objectives of the comprehensive plan. Official controls may include ordinances tablishing zoning, subdivision consols, sim plan ~gulations. s~it~ codes, building codes ~d officiat maps. Subd. I6. Preli~na~ approval. "Prelimin~ approve" me~s offici~ ac~on t~en by a municipally on ~ application m ~ate a subdivision which establishes ~e Hgha ~d obligations set ~o~ in section 462.358 ~d ~e applicable subflivision regulation. In accor- d~ce wi~ section 462.3~8. and unless o~he~ise specified in ~e applicable subdivision ulna(on, preli~ approv~ may be ~ed only following ~e review ~d approval of a pre~ plat or o~her map or d~wing establishing wi~out ~ta~on ~e number, layout. ~d loca~on of Ion. ~ca. b[oc~, md pac=ts to be created, loca~on of s=ee~, roa~, utili- Zes ~d facili~e~, p~k ad drainage facili~es, and lands to be dedicated ~or public use. Subd. 17. Proper~ ~gh~. ~e words "~ea," "~te~st N re~ prope=y." "ground." "l~d." "loC' "p~et." "prope~." "~ estate," "re~ prope=~," "ske," "te~to~," ~d "=acC' md o~er tern des~bing re~ prope~ sh~I include within ~ek me~ing, but not .7- 827 be limite 1980 c J, arz 2 s 1 462.353 Sub, nicipul pi nioipaHt5 Sub, polity displays. public o~ Sub~ any fund: polity by it in o~ciul permit or Subd pe:k o~, ~xes whic poses of th Histo~ 462~54 0 Subdi planning % vote of all: (l/It may be a di sion shall b istr~tion. T~ s~a~ ~ in ~ Subd. i adopting or 462.3585 JOINT PLANNING BOARD. Upon request of a home rule char~er or statutory, city. council or county or town board by resolution presented to the county auditor of the county of the affected territory a board shall be established to exercise planning and land use control authority in the unincorporated area within two miles of the corporate limits of a city. The board shall have membevf in a number determined by the city. county, and town. Each governmental unit shall have an equal num- ber of members. The members shall be appointed from the governing bodies of the city, county, and town. Upon request of more than one county or town board with respect to the unincorporated area within two miles of the corporate lin'dm of a single city. the parties may create one board rather than a separate board for each county or town. with equal member- ship from each affected govemmemal unit. The board shall serve as the governing body and board of appeals and adjustments for purposes of sections 462.351 to 462.36,~. within the two-mile area. The board shall have all of the powers contained in sections 462.351 to 462.36~- and shalI have authority to adopt and enforce the uniform fire code promulgated pursuant to section 299F.011. The city shall provide staff for the prepmmtion and administra- tion of land use controls unless otherwise agreed by the governmental units. If a municipality extends the application of its subdivision regulations to unincorporated territory, locamd within two miles of its limits pursuant to section 462.358. subdivision la. before the creation of a joint board, the subdivision regulations which the municipality has extended shall apply until the joint board adopts subdivision regulations. H. istory: 1982 c $07s 24 462.3S9 PROCEDURE FOR PLAN EFFECTUATION: OFFICIAL MAPS. Subdivision 1. Statement of purpose. Land that is needed for future street purposes and as sites for other necessary public facilities and services is frequently diverted to nonpub- lic uses which could have been located on other lands without hardship or inconvenience to the owners. When this happens, public uses of land may be denied or may be obtained later only at prohibitive cost or at the expense of dislocating the owner~ and occupants of the land. Identification on an official map of land needed for future public uses permits both the public and private property owners to adjust their building plans equitably and conveniently before investments are made which will make such adjustments difficult to accomplish. Sub& 2. Adoption. After the planning agency has adopted a major thoroughfare plan and a community facilities plan, it may. for the purpose of carrying out the policies of the major thoroughfare plan and community facilities plan. prepare and recommend to the gov- erning body a proposed official map coveting the entire municipality or any portion thereof. The govemthg body ma>. after holding a public hearing, adopt and amend the official map by ordinance. A notice of the time. place and purpose of the hearing shall be published in the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten days prior to the date of the hearing. The official map or maps shall be prepared in sufficient detail to permit the establishment of the future acquisition lines on the ground. In unpiatted areas a minimum of a centerline survey shall have been made prior to the preparation of the final draft of the official map. The accura- cy of the future acquisition lines shown on the official map shall be attested to by a registered land surveyor. After adoption, a copy of the official map. or sections thereof with a copy of the adopting ordinance attached shall be filed with the county recorder as provided in sec- tions 462.351 to a62.364. Subd. 3. Effect, After an official map has been adopted and filed, the issuance of build- ing permits by the municipality shall be subject to the provisions of this section. Whenever any sn-eet or highway is widened or improved or any new street is opened, or interests in lands for other public purposes are acquired by the municipality, it is not required in such proceedings to pay for any building or structure placed without a permit or in violation of conditions of a permit within the limits of the mapped street or outside of any building line that may have been established upon the existing street or within any area thus identified for punic purposes. The adoption of an official map does not give the municipality any right, title, or interest in areas identified for public purposes thereon, but the adoption of the map does authorize the municipality to acquire such interests without paying compensation for buildings or structures erected in such areas without a per'w& or in violation of the conditions of a permit. S37 Subd. 4. Appe: tion is denied, the b with it by the owner any case in which ti that the entire prop forms a pm cannot granted, and lb) thc the official map and property in the use ~ or approval is requ: hearing required b3 newspaper once at i adjustments author. board or comrrdssio of the board to insti proceedings are star provals shall issue ti' nantes. The board s~ the extent and char~ History: 1965 462.3595 CONDI'2 Subdivision 1. types of developmer activities as conditic the governing body dards and criteria st, include both genera quiremems specific Subd. 2. Publk shall be held in the ;' Sub& 3. Durst! tions agreed upon az from enacting or am Sub& ~t. Filing with the county rece paltry is located for r the property include History: 1982 462.3597 LNTERI? Subdivision 1. l ticular date, until the permit it, Sub& 2. Autho im uses. The reguIati permission for an in: ( 1 ,~ the use com (2) the date or e (3~ permission c for the public to rake mission of the use. r tOWn board by .fy u board shall :orpomted area .~rs in a nurnber an equal nurn- les of the city, respect to the ~ie part/es may qual rnernber- ning body and 6~ within the ts 462.351 to promulgated d adrninistra- :. municipality ~tory located ~ the creation :d sha~l apply ?S. :e: purposes co nonpub- tvenlence to xained later of the land. the public :nd¥ before h. ~fare plan on thereot~ :~al map by ~hed ~n the ~ng. %e he ancu~- ~gistered copy of ed in sec- : of build- vhenever teresrs in d in such ~lacion of ding line dried for ny right. at'ion for _ ~nditions -. 82? ~ Subd. 4. Appeals. If a land use or zoning permit or approval for a building in such loca- tion is denied, the board of appeals and adjustments shall have the power, upon appeal filed with it by the owner of the land. to grant a pet-mit or approval for building in such location in any case in which the board finds, upon the evidence and the azgurnents presented to it. (a} that the entire property of the appellant of which such area identified for public purposes forms a part cannot yield a reasonable remm to the owner unless such a permit or approval is granted, and lb) that balancing the interest of the municipality in preserving the integrity of the official rnap and of the comprehensive municipal plan and the interest of the owner of the property in the use of the property and in the benefits of ownership, the gxmlt of such permit or approval is required by considerndons of justice and equity. In addition to the notice of hearing required by section 462.354. subdivision 2. a notice shall be published in the official newspaper once at least ten days before the day of the hearing. If the board of appeals and adjustments authorizes the issuance of a permit or approval the governing body or other board or commission having jurisdiction shall have six months from the date of the decision of the board to institute proceedings to acquire such land or interest therein, and if no such proceedings are started within that tirrie, the officer responsible for issuing permits or ap- provals shall issue the permit or approval if the application otherwise conforms to local ordi- nances, The board shall specify the exact location, ground area. height and other details as to the extent and character of the building for which the peri'nit or approval is grnnted. History.: 1965 c 670 s 9:1976 c 181 s 2:1986 c 4-14:1995 c 254 u17 3 s 8 462..3595 CONDITIONAL USE PERblITS. Subdivision I. Authority. The governing body rnay by ordinance designate certain types of developments, including planned unit deveiopments, and certain land development activities as conditional uses under zoning regulations. Conditional uses may be approved by the governing body or other designated authority by a showing by the applicant that the ~tan- dards and criteria stated in the ordinance will be satisfied. The standards and criteria shall include both general requirernents for all conditional uses. and insofar as practicable, re- quirements specific to each designated conditional use. Subd. 2. Public hearings. Public hearings on the ~anting or' conditional use permits shall be held in the manner provided in section 462.357. subdivision 3. Subd. 3. Duration. A conditional use permit shall rernain in effect as long as the condi- tions agreed upon are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the municipality from enacting or amending official controls to change the status or' conditional uses. Subd. 4. Filing of permit. A certified copy of any conditional use permit shall be filed with the county recorder or registrar of titles of the county or counties in which the munici- pality is located for record. Tne conditional use permit shall include the legal description of the property included. History.: 1982 c 507s 25 462.3597 INTERLM USES. Subdivision 1. Definition..an "interirn use" is a temporary use of property until a par- ticular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Subd. 2. Authority. Zoning regulations may permit the governing body to allow inter- im uses. The regulations may set conditions on interim uses. The governing body may grant permission for an interim use of property if: (1) the use conforms to the zoning regulations: (2) the date or event that will terrrfinate the use can be identified with certainty; (3) permission of the use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future: and (~.) the user agrees to any conditions that the governing body deems appropriate for per- mission of' the use. Any interim use rnay be terminated by a change in zoning regulations.