Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutComp Plan Amendment (Vierling) kill - CIP 1HiI'e1Vb � O W P1 ty Identification No . City of Prior Lake Z LAIND USE APPLICA U 16200 Easle Creek Avenue S . E . / Prior Lake . Minnesota 55372 - 1714 / hone (612 ) 4474230 , Far 612 474245 Type of Application : Brief description of proposed project ( attach additional ❑ Rezoning, from (present zoninzl sheets/narrative if desired) to (Rr000sed zoninQl Amend Comp Plan to chancre the Vierlinq ® Amendment to CNbpdbile , Comp . Plan oyj&E Property from Urban Hiqh Density to some ❑ Subdivision of Land kind of Agricultural Use or Rural Density ❑ Administrative Subdivision ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Variance Applicable Ordinance Section (s ) : Prior Lake Zoning C de ❑ Other: Section 1108 . 800 Applicant(s) : Helen Vierlinq , Edward Vierljng , M i rhaPly; prl ; nn . Rebecca Vierlinq Address : 13985 N E Pike Lake Trail Prior Lake , MDI 55372 Home Phone : ( 952 ) 445 - 0283 Work Phone : Same Property Owner (s) [If different from Applicants ] : Address . Home Phone : Work Phone . Type of Ownership : Fee X Contract for Deed Purchase Agreement Legal Description of Property (Attach a copy if there is not enough space on this sheet) . See Attached To the best of my knowledge the information provided in this application and other material submitted is correct. In addition , I have read the relevant sections of the Prior Lake Ordinance and procedural guidelines , and understand that applications will not be rocessed until deemed complete by the Planning Director or assignee. Applicant ' s Signature '�> // rt' Date Fee Owner ' s Signature Date THIS SPACE TO BE FILLED IN BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR OR DESIGNEE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED DENIED DATE OF HEARING CITY COUNCIL APPROVED DENIED DATE OF HEARING CONDITIONS : Signature of Planning Director or Designee Date lu-appldoc F Southwest 1 /4 of Section 24, Township 115 , Range 22 Scott County, Minnesota GWr) ed '91 as Southeast 1 /4 of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22 Scott County, Minnesota, except the South 430 feet of the West 275 feet of the said Southeast 1 /4 CAUV') �e Gt Val G t E South 430 feet of the West 275 feet of the Southeast 1 /4 of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota Cb')1 r\lf- C\ Bannigan & Kelly , P. A . A T T O R N E Y S A T L. A W! 1750 NORTH CENTRAL LIFE TOWER 445 MINNESOTA STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-2132 JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR. (651 ) 224-3731 PATRICK J. KELLY Facsimile ( 651 ) 2234019 SONG LO FAWCETT STEPHEN KELLY Internet .address- SIA. Lo banketly@uswest.net JULI STENSLANND KATHLEEN "A, LOUCKS October 26 , 2000 Mr. Don Rye, Planning Director CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Southeast Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372- 1769 RE: Vierling property in Scott County Dear Mr. Rye : The firm of Banmgan & Kelly, P . A. represents the Vierlings Farms and Helen, Ed, Michael and Becky Vierling. Pursuant to City Ordinance § 1108 . 802 , please find enclosed: 1 . City of Prior Lake Land Use Application.; 2 . a check in the amount of $ 500 . 00 30 two copies of a list of names and addresses of owners of record of all properties within 500 feet of the parcel for which the change is requested 4 * the following maps showing the properties within 500 feet of the parcel : a. north 1 /2 of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22 b . south 1 /2 of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22 c . north 1 /2 of Section 24 , Township 115 , Range 22 d. south 1 /2 of Section 24 , Township 115 , Range 22 e . north 1 /2 of Section 25 , Township 115 , Range 22 f. north 1 /2 of Section 26 , Township 115 , Range 22 :\lois\pat\vierling\agpreserve\RYE3 .DOC Letter to Don Rye from Page 2 Stephen Kelly October 26, 2000 If you have any further requirements please notify us immediately . Thank you for your assistance . Sincerely yours , BANNIGAN & KELLY, P .A . Stephen Kelly 4 enclosure cc : Mrs . Helen Vierling Mr. Ed Vierling Mr. and Mrs . Michael Vierling f c k 3 4 { : \lois\pat\vierling\agpreserve\RYE3 .DOC TC906D 10 T70 ACS Tax System Inquiry Bill No . Parcel No . Name Taxpayer / Legal Info R R 259230010 HELEN A VIERLING 0 $ 112112 .0,0,1, P) I'M2"L'AkE, MN „5,5,3 ,7 ,2 , , , , , , , Tax Codes District Code 2001 Taxpayer 13783 Twn / Sch 0800 0719 HELEN A VIERLING Spec Dist 509 032 164 505 507 548 14310 PIKE LAKE TRL NE User Codes PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 TIF District Pro erty Address 13p975 PIKE LAKE TRL NE PRIOR LAKE 55372 Alternate Legal Description Sect / Twn / Range 23 115 022 Plat Escrow Lot / BlockDeeded 65 . 29 AC S 68A OF SE1 / 4 EX S 430 ' OF W 275 ' Other 27226 ETAL MICHAEL & EDWARD VIERLING More Legal ? N More Addresses ? Y NO BILL # ASSIGNED Mod ? Action ? i TC906D 10 T70 ACS Tax System Inquiry Bill No . Parcel No . Name Taxpayer / Legal Info R R 259230012 MICHAEL B VIERLING 0 , , , , ,2 ,0,0 ,1, ,P1 'I'0Y2' 'LAXE' W I ,5,5,3 ,7 ,2 , , , , , , , , , , , 11 ItIll Tax Codes District Code 2001 Taxpayer 44841 Twn / Sch 0800 0719 MICHAEL B VIERLING Spec Dist 509 032 164 505 507 548 13985 PIKE LAKE TRL User Codes PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 TIF District Pro erty Address 13p985 PIKE LAKE TRL NE PRIOR LAKE 55372 Alternate Legal Description Sect / Twn / Range 23 115 022 Plat Escrow Lot / Block 23 115 22 2 . 71 S 430 ' OF W 275 ' OF SEI / 4 Other More Legal ? N More Addresses ? Y NO BILL # ASSIGNED Mod ? Action ? TC906D 10 T70 ACS Tax System Inquiry Bill No . Parcel No . Name Taxpayer / Legal Info R R 259230150 HELEN A VIERLING 0 ,2 ,0 ,0,1, , , , , , , P kl'O k LAKE' M9 1 15,5,3 ,7 ,2 , , , , , , , , , , , It Plitt Tax Codes District Code 2007 Taxpayer 13783 Twn / Sch 0800 0720 HELEN A VIERLING Spec Dist 509 032 164 505 507 548 14310 PIKE LAKE TRL NE User Codes PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 TIF District Property Address NO GPAS RECORD Alternate Legal Description Sect / Twn / Range 23 115 022 Plat Escrow Lot / Block Deeded 92 . 00 AC N 92A OF SE1 / 4 Other 27226 ETAL MICHAEL & EDWARD VIERLING More Legal ? N More Addresses ? Y NO BILL # ASSIGNED Mod ? Action ? TC906D 10 T70 ACS Tax System Inquiry Bill No . Parcel No . Name Taxpayer / Legal Info R R 259240030 HELEN A VIERLING 0 , , , , , ,2 ,0,0,1, , , , „ , PJ I'01 tAkk MN '5,5,3 ,7 ,2 , , , , , , , 11111 Tax Codes District Code 2007 Taxpayer 13783 Twn / Sch 0800 0720 HELEN A VIERLING Spec Dist 509 032 164 505 507 548 14310 PIKE LAKE TRL NE User Codes PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 TIF District Property Address NO GPAS RECORD Alternate Legal Description Sect / Twn / Range 24 115 022 Plat Escrow Lot / Block Deeded 160 . 00 AC SWI / 4 Other 27226 ETAL MICHAEL & EDWARD VIERLING More Legal ? N More Addresses ? Y NO BILL # ASSIGNED Mod ? Action ? PPLICATIONS APPLICATION MATERIALS 1 VI r WELLS FARGO BANK41 , Il 1V ;I 11, '0 7 .7 BANN1GANaIIV & KELLY !' `A1V _ MINNESOTA N A IV 1750 NORTHVNTHALLIFETOWER } ': MINNEAPOLIS MN 55479 445 MINNESOTA"STREET - 17 1 910 { SAINTPAUL; MN V. I .55101 EIV I DATE .: _ mm pot I It I CHECK AMOUNT Vv 11 / 20 / 00 * * * * $ 500 . 00 PAY "V TO THE * * * 'FIVE HUNDRED 1 & 00 / 100 DOLLARS 8 ORDER V OF : ° i City of Prior Lake b s c / o Connie Carlson , City Planner 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S . E . Prior Lake MN 55372 I — NP 11000 10 ? 711 ' 1809 10000 1911 : 20 20 2 7 ? 0 ? 311' PRIp RECEIPT # 38524 •Q CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 16200 EAGLE CREEK AVE SE U PRIOR LAKE , MN 55372 �. (612) 447 -4230 , FAX (612) 447-4245 DATE : INNESO� Received of the sum of V dollars for the purpose of CU Invoice # 5 . Receipt Clerk for the C ' y of Prior Lake • Resolution • and Minutes I ` L: \TEMP LA TEFF IL E INFO . D O C Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 C . Case File #00484 The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in Sections 23 and 24, Township 115, Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density. Vonhof stated the Commissioners just received information submitted by the applicant and will not have time to review. However, testimony would be taken by the public and most likely the hearing will continue to the next meeting . Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated January 16, 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling have filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land. This property is presently zoned A (Agricultural) . The east 160 acres of the site are designated as C-BO (Business Office Park) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map , and the west 160 acres of the site is designated as R-HD (High Density Residential) . The applicants have requested these designations be changed to Rural Density. The total site consists of approximately 320 acres and has been cropland for several years, although some portions of the site are wooded. The property is used for agricultural purposes . There is a farmstead and outbuildings located in the southwest corner of the site . Also, the site is subject to the provisions of the State Wetland Conservation Act. In 2000, the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program. The City refused this request on the basis the property no longer qualified for program participation. The City has no objection to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax protection for existing farmland. The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners . The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term agriculture has been in place since 1995 . The applicants have not demonstrated any need to change this designation. Staff recommended denial of the request. Comments from the public . Attorney Patrick Kelly, Kelly & Fawcett Law Firm, 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza, St. Paul, representing the applicants, stated the property does not qualify for the Agriculture Preserve Program is because of the Comprehensive Plan . Kelly said land under the R-HD zoning equates to 30 units per acre. Kelly believes his calculations would be 4,000 to 5,000 units with the 160 acre parcel . This is not part of the MUSA. They studied the area dealing with L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 6 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 well system issues . When and if the Vierlings decide to rezone, the City ' s infrastructure would be impacted . The Vierlings have been farming this property for 150 years . As part of the operation the Vierlings utilize approximately 170 acres on County Roads 42 and 21 . They also have 55 acres on Prior Lake . If the operation is shut down they will have no choice but to develop . Stamson pointed out the City is not asking for the amendment, the Vierlings are . Kelly felt by amending the Comprehensive Plan the City has knocked out the farming process . If they are out of the Ag Preserve they will be piece-mealing the development . Sections of 20 or 30 acres will become office park or commercial . This is a contradiction in reality, normally developers come in and want to put 4, 000 or 5 , 000 units or 3 story office buildings . The Vierlings are asking the City to put them back in the Ag Preserve and farm . It is an 8 year period . With the Ag Preserve Plan they will maintain farming . It is a benefit of open space for the community . Their farming is a profitable operation . Stamson pointed out the Vierlings initiated the 240 acres removal out of the Ag Preserve two years prior to the City changing the Comprehensive Plan. Kelly said at that time, Helen Vierling ' s husband Leo was running the farm and there were other issues going on in the City of Prior Lake . Leo chose not to re- enroll but he figured he had this 8 year window to take a look at it and see what was going on with development. Leo passed away in 1995 and his wish was to continue farming with his son, Michael . Michael has been successful and this is the direction the family would like to go . Most cities are striving for open space and the Vierlings are trying to accomplish that. Stamson referenced the staff report suggesting the alternative of Green Acres . Kelly said it does not do what the Ag Preserve does . Kelly then summarized the Ag Preserve definition . (473H . 01 Minnesota Statutes) . Stamson clarified the benefits of the Ag Preserve : • Better tax advantages • Protected from eminent domain • Special Assessments • Zoning Conflicts Stamson asked Kelly what Ag Preserve does not do . Kelly responded it involves a tax-type situation where it allows deferring assessments as soon as the farming operation ends . With Ag Preserve, the cities can act different ways through the power of zoning . If the farmer is in the Ag Preserve he does not have to worry about the headaches of conflict with the best intentions of the city. Green Acres does not protect like the Ag Preserve . Kelly went on to say there has been correspondence back and forth with the City of Prior Lake since February of 1999 . Atwood questioned if the remaining 110 acres are part of the Ag Preserve . Kelly responded it was part of the operation of the farm, but there is a drainage problem with the lake property . It is zoned office/commercial on the corner of County Roads 41 and 21 . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 7 r Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 Lemke questioned what governmental body approves the Ag Preserve . Kelly responded once the City okays it, it is reviewed by the County and ultimately approved by the Met Council . McDermott clarified there is trunk sewer and water along County Road 42 and this area . When the County Road 42 and Pike Lake construction started a few years ago , there were crossings put in to the north side of County Road 42 . She stated she would be happy to provide Mr. Kelly with the plans . Stamson asked if there were any other designations besides Rural Residential that would allow Ag Preserve . Kansier answered there was not. Comments from the public : Mike Vierling, 13985 Pike Lake Trail, thanked his neighbors for the support. Vierling said people ask him why he just doesn ' t pack up his bags and go somewhere else . Sometimes money does not buy happiness . He does not want to farm anywhere else . It wouldn ' t be the same . Vierling explained some of the problems he will have if he is not in the Ag Preserve . He would like to see his sons have the opportunity to farm just like his Dad gave him . The neighbors love the open spaces . He knows he will eventually be forced out . Pretty soon there is going to houses everywhere . He wants to run the farm like a business . He can ' t do that unless he is in the Ag Preserve program and asks for the City ' s support. What is 8 years down the line? Even if he wanted to sell it would take years get it right. Stamson questioned Vierling if 8 years is a long enough period to justify the improvements he would like to make . Is it enough? Vierling said it was and went on to say he does not want to put in any improvements until he knows what is going on . Lucy Vierling Cunningham, stated the family has been farming for many years and are dedicated to the farm . This is not the time to sell . She has a family, works full time and still works on the farm. Dan Klamm, 4130 140th Street NE , has known the Vierlings for 15 years and felt it was great to see the farm exist for 150 years . Eight years is not long . Maybe the City has had disagreements with the Vierlings but the community should come together on this issue . Paul Lindahl, 2560 Muhlenhardt Road, felt the farm is a beautiful setting . The Vierlings are asking for help . It is hard for a farmer to ask for assistance . It seems like such a minor thing, at least give them a chance . They have done a lot for the community . Russ Dunker, 4487 Chestnut Lane, said he does not know the Vierlings well but sees Mike a few times a year. Mike has a real passion for what he does . Dunker felt it was not unreasonable for the Vierlings to want the tax advantages . He is in support of the Vierlings farming for as long as they want. They are very good neighbors . Rita Baden, 13866 Pike Lake Trail, questioned how farm land is taken out of rural density when it is being farmed. Why does the community feel they can make these changes? If the Vierlings are willing to farm, let them make the choice . We are losing our open space . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO116O1 .doc 8 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 Kansier explained the zoning is still agriculture and farming is a permitted use . The Vierlings can continue to farm as long as they like . The Comprehensive Plan is a long term plan to identify potential uses of property to allow the City, County and the rest of the community to plan for things like municipal services , road systems , the park systems , including the farm land . The City has no intention of stopping the Vierlings from farming . The City is required to plan long term . The zoning has not changed and the City is not requesting the amendment. Kansier clarified the 8 years in Ag Preserve . Once the property is in the Ag Preserve Program it does not come out until requested by the property owner. Once they make the request the 8 year time frame starts . It is not just 8 years, it will go on until the law changes . Kevin Shadduck, 4841 Beach Street, said the Vierlings have been great neighbors . The only reason not to help the Vierlings farm is to perceive that the City wants to force them to sell so the City can get a bigger tax base . It is a terrible motivation not to help a farmer. Joe Zieska, 5316 Hampton, said he has looked out his window the last 14 years to see the Vierling property and if they desire to farm for the next 100 or 200 years they can . But that is not the issue . The property is zoned agriculture . He doesn ' t believe in the history of Prior Lake (inaudible) . To paraphrase Mr. Kelly we have to look at this logically from the facts . First I would like to straighten out a few facts from Mr. Kelly . He stated the property was zoned RHD (Rural High Density) — it is not. It is zoned Agriculture . The Comprehensive Plan is RHD and CBO . He mentioned building 4, 500 housing units on the land . The City only has 3 ,000 houses . I don ' t see how he can put 4, 500 in that little spot. He talks about putting manufacturing and industrial in CBO . Those uses are not allowed . It has to be business office park. Kelly speculated on the needed infrastructure and traffic on County Road 42 . He talks about the breakdown of County Road 42 in Burnsville . There isn ' t anyone here that would tell us that 42 in Burnsville is broke down . That is why we need long range planning . The City has to look at what the plan could possibly be used for in the future . As the City Engineer pointed out, they oversized and put trunk sewer and water mains in to get across County Road 42 to get to Pike Lake trail projects in anticipation of future developments . It is only right for the homeowners who live adjacent to this property. Anyone who has been on the Planning Commission for any length of time finds when there is difficult rezoning problems, it is not from the land owner, it is from the adjacent property owners . When I bought my house I never knew what was going to be there . The property owners along County Roads 42 and 18 , Pike Lake Trail will sell some day or somebody else moves in and sees the beautiful farm and all of a sudden an office building goes up they ' ll say "What happened? There was a farm before . " By leaving it in the Comprehensive Plan as potential uses somewhere in the future those people who purchase that property will know potentially what can go in there . These are the reasons the Comprehensive Plan should be left as is . It has nothing to do with present day land use . Dave Baden, said the Vierlings are hard workers . The cows are good neighbors too . The open space in Prior Lake is disappearing, we need less development. He hopes the Vierlings will be farming for another 80 years , not just 8 . Linda Lehman, 13231 Henning Circle, said she has been working with the Vierlings for the past 5 years on the environmental compliance for their feedlots . Mike Vierling is looking at spending $ 35 , 000 to $ 65 , 000 to come into compliance with the feedlot. He needs to know if L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 9 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 he will be able to farm there for the next 8 to 10 years for that issue alone . Would like the Commissioners to allow him to continue not only for the cost issue but also for compliance and whatever protection he needs from the Ag Preserve . Yvonne Anderson, 13220 Pike Lake, Program Manager for the YMCA Camp and caretaker since 1982 said the Camp has been on Pike Lake since the 1960 ' s . At some time the YMCA Camp will be put into a situation of the potential land use . The 80 acres they are on allows 2 , 500 youth each summer to come and experience the outdoors . Anderson supported the Vierlings and asked the Commission to remember the green space . Cindy Stark, 14730 Rosewood Road, enjoys looking over the Vierling property and Prior Lake . The Vierling farm gives their children the opportunity to see a hard working farm. Greg Engabos, 4931 Beach Street, appreciates what the City has done in developing the Comprehensive Plan and understands proper planning . If it is the intent of the City of Prior Lake to let the Vierlings continue farming, it should be demonstrated they could be put in the best economic situation possible by allowing the Agricultural designation . Both intentions would be met. Jadin Bragg, Carriage Hills Development, said he listened to the Commissioners earlier determining if there was hardship for a deck. He said it seems ridiculous the Commissioners are pointing out they cannot change the Comprehensive Plan to let the Vierlings have what they need . It is causing them economic hardship . Think about the area you live in . Residents want to drive by a farm not high rise buildings . Bragg said he loves the fact he can see Jeffers Pond and the cows . Don ' t change it. Kenny Landherr, 14612 Rosewood Road, said from his family perspective they feel fortunate to live next to the Vierling property and was the main reason they moved there . The bigger issue is that it is a wonderful opportunity for his children to experience the farm . K. R. Radin, 14211 Shore Lane, enjoys seeing the cows and felt Mike Vierling should have the opportunity to continue farming. The hearing was closed to the public . Commissioner Vonhof stated that since the Commissioners received a large packet of material just before the meeting, they would like to continue the public hearing and give the Commissioners time to review the information . MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY CRIEGO , TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO JANUARY 29 , 2001 . Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . Stamson asked for a detailed definition of Green Acres and Ag Preserve specifically the tax details for the next packet. A recess was called at 8 : 12 p . m . The meeting reconvened at 8 : 19 p .m . L:\O1Fles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 10 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12 , 2001 1 . Call to Order . Acting Chair Stamson called the February 12 , 2001 , Planning Commission meeting to order at 6 : 30 p .m . Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Criego , Lemke and Stamson, Planning Director Don Rye, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, City Engineer Sue McDermott, Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson . 2 . Roll Call . Atwood Absent * Criego Present Lemke Present Stamson Present Vonhof Absent 3 . Approval of Minutes : The Minutes from the January 16 , 2001 , Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented . * Commissioner Atwood arrived at 6 : 32 p . m . Commissioner Stamson read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting . 4 . Public Hearings . A. Case File #00- 084 (Continued) The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in Sections 23 and 24 , Township 115, Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated February 12 , 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planner . Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAR 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C -BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land. L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doe 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 . At that meeting, the applicants ' representatives distributed a packet of information. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing in order to review this information . The public hearing was closed at that time . The January 15 , 2001 , letter submitted by the firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. , representatives of the applicants , contained several reasons they believe the Comprehensive Plan should be amended . Kansier categorically contested each item listed in their letter. In 2000, the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program. The City refused this request on the basis the property no longer qualified for program participation because it failed to meet the statutory requirements . The current Comprehensive Plan designation of the property does not preclude the use of this land for agricultural purposes . The City has no objection to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax protection for existing farmland. The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners . The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency submitted a letter dated February 1 , 2001 indicating a long history with the applicant on water quality runoff issues . The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term agriculture has been in place since 1995 . The applicants have not demonstrated any need to change this designation. Staff recommended denial of the request . Questions from the Commissioners : Criego : • Questioned why only 240 acres out of the 320 acres are being asked to change . Kansier said the request includes all 320 acres . The 240 acres are what the Vierlings initiated for removal . • Why would the remaining acreage have to be requested? Kansier responded it was still in the Ag Preserve Program. But it no longer meets the statutory requirements . The City has taken no steps to initiate removal of that property. • If the City would take action it would probably take 8 years ? Kansier said it was her understanding the City would have to adopt a resolution stating initiation of removal and it would take 8 years before it actually came out. • Questioned the tax issues and the City' s ability to take over property as well as enforce ordinances in the area. Kansier explained the public projects relating to the Ag Preserve Ordinance . • Criego and Stamson recapped the definition . • Questioned State regulations from the PCA. L:\Olftles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 2 Planning Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 Comments from the Public : Jim Sullivan, Enforcement Project Leader for the Southeast District of the State, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, MPCA, 520 Lafayette Road, St . Paul, MN 55155 , stated the environmental issues came up in 1996 when the MPCA was first made aware of the discharge issue . The Agency and Vierlings have made some effort to address some of the issues . Sullivan said he did not want to make excuses as to why the issue has not been resolved, but there has been administrative process related to enforcement issues . They are downsizing government and the Agency has been reorganized . MPCA is looking for assurance that the discharge from the facility does not exceed State Water Quality Standards . The other option is a no discharge facility under the Federal Rules . The agency is currently negotiating with the farm to address the issues and set a corrective action plan within the next month. Criego asked if the property was in the Ag Preserve Program would the MPCA have the same rights to impose . Sullivan responded it had no impact on their ability to regulate . The Ag Program is not a program they administer. He went on to say on the Federal level, that there are a number of grant program to help farmers . Sullivan said he is not aware of the affects of the City ' s Comprehensive Plan; the District Conservationists for the NRCS could answer that better. Criego questioned if the land was in Ag Preserve, would the regulations referred to still apply. Sullivan said "Absolutely, the MPCA regulations still stand" . Being in the Ag Program may not help with the funding . Commissioner Stamson re-opened the public hearing . Comments from the Public : Attorney Patrick Kelly of Kelly & Fawcett Law Firm in St. Paul, representing the Vierlings , said the key issue is that the City Planners are representing no plans of rezoning . The Vierlings are asking for purposes of the farm operation to allow them to go into the Ag Preserve , The Vierlings want to continue farming and have no plans to rezone . It is important to allow the farming operation to continue . They have an 8 year plan and the Ag Preserve allows farming without intrusion from local regulations . Michael Vierling, 13985 Pike Lake Trail, said his farm produces soybeans and milk. In 1976 the State of Minnesota certified the Vierling farm as a century farm . There are State programs to protect the land from 10 to 30 years . Vierling said he did not want to put money into the operation and two years later have the City come and take his land. He has to improve the feedlot. At the last meeting the neighbors said they wanted the Vierlings to farm . The Constitution said there should be freedom . Vierling felt it was not fair he should lose out on all the programs just because he lives in Prior Lake . The City is saying it is ready to develop . He would like to continue farming at least 10 years until he knows what his kids want to do . If he continues farming for 10 years, the 2020 Plan will still be 10 years away . That is why his Dad took the land out of Ag Preserve because L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO21201 .doc 3 Planning Commission Meeting FeGrnmy 12, 2001 you don ' t know what the future is going to be . Vierling quoted the Prior Lake American quoted the City, Mayor Wes Mader and a neighbor. He said he felt if the City doesn ' t let his family farm with his kids , you might as well get a machine gun and blow everyone away . Gary Matson, 4584 Hummingbird Trail, lived in Prior Lake two years , said everyone is taken away by the beauty of the Vierling farm . He hopes that carries some weight. Dan Klamm, 4130 140th Street, said his family fought for this Country, it bothers him to see how this piece of America and history is going down . It bothers him that the Ag Preserve gives the City the power to stop whatever makes the Vierling farm go . Klamm told the Commissioners to give it to the Vierlings , turn the cheek and help them farm . People move to Prior Lake for recreation, quality of life, quality people, a good time and a community that cares for one another. Kimbel R. Raden, 14211 Shore Lane, does not know what Council members like or dislike the farms . People who like the farm probably had relatives on the farm and probably had to actually go out and work for a days living . The people who don ' t like farms would rather slip a gas station here or there or on somebody else. They ' re not really telling anybody what is going on because they know how to make a little more money for the City. He stated he understands making money for the City. One of the reasons he moved to the City is because of Mike and Becky ' s farm . Radin is from a farm background and military background and comes from a hardworking family. He totally respects anyone who goes out and works day in and day out. When it is up to a group of people to decide for a man or woman for their kids ' fate not to be able to carry on what they want to do . He felt every citizen in Prior Lake should know who hates the open spaces and farms . Then we know who we ' re up against. It is good for everybody. Raden felt the Commissioners should side with the farm . The public hearing was closed . Comments from the Commissioners : Criego : • It is hard to fight the issue of having or not having a farm . I would love to see the farm another 300 years . It is not the issue . I would love to have open land all around. Prior Lake is growing . How do we grow sensibly without causing hardship for individuals ? Prior Lake is a small community and limited for growth. • The question is , do we want to grow the City any larger than it is now? The 2020 Comprehensive Plan does say that we need to grow and we will grow based on various input from the citizens of Prior Lake . There have been many meetings on the Comprehensive Plan and they address all these issues before us tonight . Do we all agree? Obviously not . • Would I like to have many more farms ? Absolutely. • Is it possible long term? Probably not . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 4 Planning Commission Meeting Febrnay 12, 2001 • I would love to slow the process . The one thing that comes back to me . Not against the Ag Preserve Program if it has benefits for the Vierling family. • Concern is that once it goes back to Ag Preserve . It could stay that way for another 150 years to 300 years . Is that really what the citizens of Prior Lake want? • This is an emotional issue . • Not clear after all the testimony from Mr. Kelly and the City what the true benefit of the Ag Preserve Program other than it leaves control within the family . Which we all know in 1993 the family decided to pull out of the Ag Preserve . It was not the City nor the citizens decision, it was the Vierling ' s decision. • I believe there was a logical reason Mr. Vierling did that. We do not know what Mr. Vierling saw . • If I could get a guaranty of 8 to 10 years, I would be more than happy to agree . But the fact is once it goes back to preserve it could be locked up forever. Stamson : • Don ' t come up and point your finger and say you are going to force them off the farm after you just moved in to a new house on somebody else ' s farm. People have to realize the decisions made affect somebody . It is not the City who is the bad guy here, the City is responding to what is going on in the community. • Prior Lake is a growing community and we have these issues before us . The City is responding not initiating this issue. • Agreed with Criego , the farm is an asset to the community . The issue is not that the City wants the farm . • The Comprehensive Plan is long term. The realty is this community will not be rural in 2020, regardless of the actions taken today. What the City is saying is if the Vierlings decide to sell, and someone decides to develop , the City would like the land use to be Business Office Park and high density. The decision to sell is entirely up to Mr. Vierling. • There has to be some type of plan that drives the City in the future to say here is what we want the City to look like, so it is an efficient and an attractive City at the time it is built . Otherwise it will end up haphazard like cities out east that develop without this type of planning . • I downloaded information from the State and read through Agriculture Preserve which repeats over and over again, is long-term farm uses . Their idea of long term is 8 years to get it out. Their idea of long term is a minimum of 8 . • Mr. Vierling stated he would like to farm 8 to 10 years . He will not be forced out . The marketing conditions in this area are not going to force him off in that amount of time . The surrounding cities and suburbs will more likely attract developers before Prior Lake . It is not in demand . • The idea of Ag Preserve was not to cut a deal for a few years . The program stresses long-term farming . Even Mr. Vierling stated it is not his intent . He is looking at 10 years . That is not the intention of the Ag Preserve program . • The issue is what the Comp Plan does and what it needs to be . Rural residential was designed for area where there are no services available to allow agriculture L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 5 Planning Commission Meeting Februmy 12, 2001 uses for a longer term, maybe 30 or 40 years . This is not appropriate for this place . • The feeling of the Commissioners and Council five years ago and when the Comprehensive Plan was recently update the idea was this area will develop 15 to 20 years out. • The uses are appropriate . Cannot support changes . Lemke : • Agreed with the comments from the Commissioners . It is an emotional issue . • What we are talking about is not what the land is going to be used for tomorrow. It is zoned Agriculture, tomorrow it will be agriculture . We are talking about somewhere in the future . If the land is developed what will it look like . • I wouldn ' t be truthful or honest to say 20 or 30 years down the road that it will still be agriculture . • Anyone else moving out here has the right to look at a Comprehensive Plan and know what the future of that land will look like . • Mr. Vierling and his attorney, Mr. Kelly stated the land would be developed some day. • Will not support changing the existing designation of the Comprehensive Plan. Atwood : • Couldn ' t agree more on an emotionally charged issue . • Is rural density appropriate? Kansier explained the designation and the services . • If the Comprehensive Plan is amended, what is the process and the cost for the City? Kansier explained the process — two ways it could be amended again . The City would do an update of the plan . The costs are staff time, publications , public hearing notices and hearing costs . The other option would be for the property owner to file an amendment, the process is the same — go before the Planning Commission and then the final decision is made by the City Council . The filing fees generally do not cover the full cost of the process . The cost if initiated by the City is paid by the taxpayers . • Time frame? Kansier said it could take 45 to 90 days depending on meeting schedules . • The Metropolitan Council needs to approve all Comp Plan Amendments . • The Planning Commission is an advisory committee who makes a recommendation to the City Council . • What does it look like to the citizens of Prior Lake if the Comp Plan is amended? Kansier explained it gives residents and others who move here an idea of what the plan will be through the year 2020 . The document can be changed . • Nobody will come in and take the Vierling farm a minute after 2020 . Some people see this as a threat of taking the farm . • See no reason not to let them apply for the Ag Preserve program . • There are two sides to everything . Does not see a burden on the City to change the Comp Plan. • Would like to see the Vierlings step up to the plate and pay the costs . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO21201 .doc 6 Planning Commission Meeting Februmy 12, 2001 • If this does not pass, the Commission does not make the final decision; no one is trying to take away the beautiful farm . Criego : • Missing something, a month ago, the taxes were one of the big issues . The Vierlings claimed it was a tax problem if it was not in Ag Preserve . That is not so . • Two things are coming across . One is the fear the City is going to do something that would inhibit you from farming . The second concern is putting up any accessory structures because of requests the City might require . • The MPCA says they are trying to help the Vierlings to not pollute the water and there is some funding available to help . The only thing I can put my finger on is fear of the City taking over some of the property. • Mike Vierling said, "Just look at what the City did to the Mendens and Kops . Look what they had to do to fight . The Kops lost their farm . I ' m the only one left . The Jeffers farm is going to be developed. The City took their farms away. The City is always looking for parks , fire stations , whatever. Why should I put in thousands of dollars into that feedlot and like the MPCA said if I don ' t get into the Ag Preserve Program I won ' t get no funding . Why should I put all the money in? What is the difference in the Zoning? The City can take it out tomorrow . " • Kansier responded the City could not take it out unless the Comprehensive Plan was amended. • Why would the City amend it now then turn around and amend it again? It doesn ' t make sense . • Vierling asked if the City could guarantee 10 years ? • The concern is what could happen is that the kids and their kids want to continue farming and more power to them . At least in the Comprehensive Plan • We as citizens have seen what happens when a City tries to take over land . There is a huge outcry and there should be . There is no intent of takeover of the farm . It is up to the Vierlings if they want to develop the property . • Vierling questioned what would happen if he guaranteed he would take it out in 10 years . • Kansier pointed out Mr. Vierling ' s intentions are good but probably not legal . It would be provisional contract zoning which is illegal in the State. The City would have to talk to the City Attorney . • Mr. Kelly said he was a City Attorney for a number of cities in the metropolitan area and stated agreements could be made in unique situations like this and amend the Comprehensive Plan at any time. The City is under the obligation under the 2020 plan to re-look at the Comprehensive Plan. Kelly said the Vierlings could give the City a guarantee in 10 years they are going to be out farming . They want the 10 years to allow the farming use based on their land use experts and engineers . The Ag Preserve gives the Vierlings all the things they want to do . • Do we (Commissioners) need legal advice on the 10 year agreement? Kansier said they would . • Can the Commissioners pass a recommendation to City Council with certain conditions and let City Council and the legal staff decide if it is appropriate ? L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 7 Planning Commission Meeting Februmy 12, 2001 Kansier said there is nothing stopping the Commission from making a recommendation. Stamson : • Opposed to that approach, it is bad government . This is a long term planning document . The idea for government is to treat the community as a whole and look out for the entire community ' s best interest. The drive is to direct development further out . This would happen all over the City if that if that is agreed to , • Agree it is a tough decision. Criego : • The Comp Plan is known for a long range plan, do not see any problem modifying the plan. Stamson : • It should be modified on situations that are changing to alter the long term plans . We can ' t make long term plans reflect short term goals . That is not the way to do it . Atwood : • Questioned Criego why 10 years makes him feel better? Criego responded if there is no time limit it can be farmed for the next 300 years . That is detrimental to the City of Prior Lake . To have the City give up that right at this point is not a proper judgment. The proper judgment would be to give the citizens and the Vierlings what they need . And if that is 10 years more power to them . That doesn ' t mean they have to stop farming, it just comes out of the Ag Preserve. • Questioned Criego why he felt if the Vierlings farmed another 10 years it would be detrimental to Prior Lake . Criego felt in the Ag Preserve program it is . The Green Acre program is fine . At some point a developer will pay an enormous price to develop that land . If it is in the Ag Preserve it will take 8 years to get out of the program. By that time the developer will be long gone and find another piece of property. If it ' s not in the Ag Preserve, the Vierlings can sell the property at that point and take advantage of the offer. • Questioned Criego why he (the City) would be making that decision for the Vierlings . Criego responded the Vierlings took the land out of the Ag Preserve in 1993 ) it was not the City. • The City based their 1995 Comprehensive Plan on the Vierlings taking the land out of the Ag Preserve . It was done that way because of the Vierlings . • Criego felt 10 years was a good compromise . The Comprehensive Plan is a 20 year document. • The Vierlings should be able to decide . Does not have a problem with the Vierlings staying in Ag Preserve . • Criego responded that the Comprehensive Plan which was discussed with the citizens of Prior Lake, the Planning Commission and City Council and because of the actions of the Vierlings they decided to make the land something different L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 8 Planning Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 from farming . Now because of financial considerations and a fear of the government, the Vierlings would like the Ag Program to be re-instituted for a period of time . I can accept that, but not forever. They can still farm forever; no one says they can ' t, just not under the Ag Preserve program . Stamson : • The bottom line is there is no financial impact. The real concern is that the City is going to initiate something that will cease the existence of the farm, which may or may not happen. • Criego felt the Commission is a buffer between the citizens of Prior Lake and the government . The City may or may not cease the operation. The chances of stopping the operation are minute . Understand Vierlings ' fear. • This document has been worked on for a long time and under the scrutiny of the Met Council and now we ' re talking about changing . We should not base the amendment on one family ' s fear of what is not going to happen . This is not the way to run a government . It is not good for the balance of the citizens of Prior Lake. Kansier explained the Comprehensive Plan and all approvals from the Met Council . Atwood : • Does not want to be part of a Commission that anyone can stand up and put a Superamerica in my next door lot. That ' s not what we ' re doing here . • There is tons of sentiment in this community and this property is a landmark, for those reasons we should extend a hand for some peace of mind, whether or not we agree with it. Their fears are real . Why tie their (the Vierlings) hands behind their back . Stamson : • There is no concrete actionable thing the City is doing to stop the farming operation. The fear something might happen is a less valid reason to re-write the ordinance . • This is a primary piece of real estate . It is on the corner to two major roads in a developing community. Is the best use of that land rural residential? It is not what Mr. Vierling wants to do with is property, that ' s up to him . From the City ' s point of view, is rural residential the best use for that property? It is not, long term . • If Mr. Vierling wants to stay in the farm, that ' s up to him . What the Comprehensive Plan does is set an instance if he decides to quit farming what is going to happen to it? • We are discussing a planning document and what the purpose is . Atwood : • Agreed. But felt there are certain circumstances that dictate certain allowances and this one of the instances . • Believes the average citizen in Prior Lake would agree . L :\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 9 Planting Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 Lemke : • Questioned Mr. Kelly on eminent domain protection. Kelly read the Met Council ' s interpretation . • Understand under eminent domain the land can be condemned in a one year time frame . • Kelly said that definition is going on the Ag Preserve Program . • Kelly responded the Vierlings are concerned that a government agency will come in and condemn part of the farm. The Ag Preserve will protect them from any government agency and let them continue farming . • The authority ' s right under eminent domain, the 8 years would not be an ironclad guarantee . If an authority came in to condemn this property even though it is in Ag Preserve, the EQB would look at it and say no other alternative exists, they can only delay it for one year if another alternative exist. Kelly said those procedures are on a high standard of taking the farming operation as a priority for the purpose of statute . There are a number of hoops . It ' s not just saying we want this land for "x" purpose . It has to be balanced out . • Kansier noted that procedure applies when acquiring land or easement having an area of 10 acres or more . This procedure is over and above the eminent domain procedure in the Ag Preserve . MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF STATUS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH THE CONDITION WITHIN TWO YEARS THE PROCESS TO TAKE IT OUT OF AG PRESERVE IS UNDERTAKEN BY THE OWNER THEREBY ALLOWING IT TO BE OUT OF THE AG PRESERVE WITHIN TEN YEARS . Vote taken indicated ayes by Atwood and Criego , nays by Stamson and Lemke . The motion fails . The deadline for the City to take action is in March. It can go the City Council with no recommendation . MOTION BY LEMKE, SECOND BY STAMSON, TO DENY THE REQUEST . Vote taken indicated ayes by Stamson and Lemke, nays by Atwood and Criego . The Motion fails . MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD , TO TABLE THE REQUEST TO THE FEBRUARY 26 , 2001 , MEETING. Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . A recess was called at 8 : 00 p . m . The meeting reconvened at 8 : 11 P .M. L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 10 Planning Commission Alfeeting Februay 26, 2001 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2001 1 . Call to Order : Chairman Vonhof called the February 26 , 2001 , Planning Commission meeting to order at 6 : 30 p .m . Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Lemke, Stamson and Vonhof, Planning Director Don Rye, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, City Engineer Sue McDermott, Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2 . Roll Call : Atwood Present Criego Absent Lemke Present Stamson Present Vonhof Present 3 . Approval of Minutes : The Minutes from the February 12 , 2001 , Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. Commissioner Vonhof read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting . The attorney for the first public hearing was not available at the starting time . Therefore, the agenda changed to Item 5A. (see page 9) , followed by Item 4B . (see page 5 ) . 4 . Public Hearings : A. Case File #00-084 The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in Sections 23 and 24, Township 115, Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density. (Continued front the February 12, 2001 meeting) L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doc 1 Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated February 26 , 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planner . The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 . At that meeting, the applicants ' representatives distributed a packet of information . The Planning Commission continued the public hearing in order to review this information. On February 12 , 2001 , the Planning Commission reopened the public hearing to consider this additional information as well as additional testimony. Following the testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and discussed this request . After considerable discussion, the Planning Commission considered a motion to approve this request . This motion failed on a 2.2 vote . The Planning Commission also considered a motion to deny this request. Again, the motion failed on a 2.2 vote . Rather than send this item to the City Council without a recommendation, the Commission tabled action on the request until February 26 , 2001 . No new information has been submitted . Comments from the Commissioners : Lemke : • Have not changed mind since the last meeting . • Would like to see the Vierlings farm the land as long as they want . • Do not feel it is appropriate to say the future use of the land is going to be rural density. Stamson : • There are a number of land use issues . Is long term agricultural appropriate for this piece of property? I do not think it is . It is located within the city limits , served by two major county roads, water and sewer are available to it . The Metropolitan Council has a procedure to identify permanent agricultural land. There are a number of items related to soil quality and tests . 1 ) The land is agriculture, a situation that is rapidly disappearing ; 2) Adjacent land is zoned agriculture and; 3 ) the land is outside the future urban area, a designation set by the Metropolitan Council relating to the MUSA and the land use in 2040 . The property meets none of the criteria that the Metropolitan Council deems appropriate for long-term agricultural use . • Talked to people responsible for rural policy at the Metropolitan Council. In their opinion they did not feel this property would meet their standards for review for land that qualifies for Agricultural Preserve status . • Are we saving farmland by protecting this piece of property? Researched a number of different sites . This action does not preserve farmland. The biggest threat to farmland is inefficient use of farmland within municipalities . By stripping off urban areas to development like this , is actually destroying the farming economy by forcing nonagricultural uses into urban areas . • This site has sewer and water available to it and is in a municipality. What we are proposing flies directly in the face of what farm preservationists are advocating . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doc 2 • Why can' t this farm exist in a sea of residential, commercial uses 30 years from now? Because like any industry farming requires the critical That support the infrastructure that it requires to operate efficiently and survive . infrastructure is not in this area, it is quickly moving south. if we small pattern of farms here and there in developed areas , we areS development to hopscotch. There will be little pockets of developments in between largely farming areas like Lydia and New Prague . That is the problem it creates . • This type of action creates more pressure for farmland and better farmland to disappear. • The applicant spoke of his fear of eminent domain preventing him from investing in his operation . The Agricultural Preserve does not prevent eminent domain procedures but creates a higher standard, which is reviewed by the Metropolitan Council . • Agree it would prevent the City taking the land for parks or some public uses . The City ' s current designation is business office park clearly t > t would b City has no intention of creating parkland . If the City wantedpa kland designated park. • Ironically, the business office park designation prevents have thatt ower separate from he schol district from using its power of eminent domain. They also P City . • The corresponding district next to the business office park designation is C5 and schools are not allowed in the C5 district . • If this is amended to rural residential and the zoning is agriculture, schools are allowed in the agriculture district. Now you have a flat piece of property with no schools and has city sewer and water available . It is an ideal location for a school on that side of the City . It is far more likely to loose the property to the school for tease of eminent eminent domain than the City . Nothing is solved . There is an domain. • The final issue is the proposal from the backhanded waymeeting for a ten of getting ement the with the applicant to rezone . That > s a short-term applicant ' s request for Agricultural Preserve approved, but in the long term we are still reverting back to the original business office park . The way it was presented was , the idea behind it was to allow the applicant to apply for grant money that the federal government does not deem him qualified under the current zoning . To me that is no different than a ce document . incme on your it It is fraudulently or misrepresenting your health on an insurance representing your intentions for a piece of property in order to obtain money from the government that they wouldn ' t give you otherwise . The City should not be a part of that . • Will not support the amendment . Patrick J . Kelly , representative for the Vierlings , said he takes issue witulen means . statement of misrepresentation of doing the Ag Preserve for some Kelly said that was untrue . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminuws\mnO22601 .doc 3 Stamson said he did not intend to imply that it was the applicant ' s intentions . By doing so , it would be the City being fraudulent by their actions . Stamson said he had no issue with the applicant and apologized if the applicant felt it was directed at him . Atwood : • Appreciate all the research from Commissioner Stamson. • Has not changed her position from the last meeting . • The Comp Plan is a fluid document . It can be looked at and amended . • This is an exceptional case where we can do that comfortably . • It is the Vierlings property and they should ultimately decide what happens . • This is an advisory commission. City Council will make the final decision . Vonhof: • Appreciate input and obvious reflection the Commissioners spent on this issue . • Worked extensively on the Comprehensive Plan from 1993 to 1995 and its ultimate approval in 1996 . At that time, the City held a number of public hearings . In my 8 years on the Commission there has never been so much interest in a planning issue . The Comprehensive Plan is a guide . It is where we as a community think we are going to be in 2010 and 2020 . This process takes a long time for everyone to have ample opportunity to be heard. It is a good process . • Believes the Comprehensive Plan also is a plan based upon information available at the time decisions are made . There is additional information that was not available in 1995 . This process took almost 2 years . • We have been told by the Vierlings that they intend to farm for some period of time . • The zoning is correct . It is appropriate . • The Comprehensive Plan should also be consistent with what the projected land use is going to be . • A lot of issues brought up have not been directly related to the basic issue . • In planning there is many time spans . A 20-year time span is a relatively long period of time . • In these types of situations , requests for amendments , people are not thinking of what we are actually looking at . We are trying to figure out what that land use is going to be 10 or 20 years down the line . • The property owners have indicated they plan to farm long term . The zoning is consistent . But that was not the Commission ' s understanding back in 1995 . • We have to get back to the basic issue at hand . What is the projected land use 10 or 15 years down the line . And we have been told it is going to be farming — agricultural . • Regardless of what the surrounding land uses are , it is possible to farm completely surrounded by residential property . • Reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and there is an anticipation that it can be modified . The key is — is there additional information? New information has been provided . Regardless of what the neighbors think or what the City thinks or location, the ultimate test in a sense goes back to what the property owner is going L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO22601 .doc 4 to do . If everyone in the City would come up and tell us what they were going to do with their property long term then obviously the Plan would be more accurate . The City ' s intent is to have as accurate a projection as we can. • We have someone who has come forward to tell us this is not accurate because it is not consistent with what our plans are. Very clearly that would justify an amendment . • The Comprehensive Plan ' intent is to have an accurate projection. • Fully respect fellow Commissioner ' s viewpoint on this matter. • Having been involved in this Plan from the beginning with a lot of time invested in this document, with the information presented to this Commission, it is consistent to support the amendment. Open discussion : Stamson : • Felt Vonhof misrepresented the idea of the Comprehensive Plan . It is not a document for what property owners intend to use their property for. If it were, there would be a mismash of uses because everyone would have different ideas of what their property should be . • The idea behind the Comp Plan is for a City to lie out what the community should look like so in years to come as it develops , it will be efficient, manageable and avoid the appearance of cities that grew before planning . Cities that are a mismash of industries in the middle of residential neighborhoods . That truly represented what owners ' long term use was . We need an orderly development of the community so it is an attractive livable community. 3 Vonhof: • Gave an analogy of a land use such as a college campus . We have information that this is what the use is going to be . That ' s the difference • in this particular case . • This use will continue . It is reflecting reality. Let ' s make it consistent with the use . Stamson : • The college property and farmland use cannot be compared. • The proposed Rural Residential district does not reflect the correct district use either. It is intended for areas without city water and sewer and residential lots for 40 acres or more . • The implication is residential use, not agricultural use . We don ' t have an agricultural designation for the Comp Plan to reflect what the Vierlings want. Vonhof: • The services in this case were driven by other developments off the Vierlmg property. • The Comprehensive Plan is a broad brush, the zoning is a more accurate land use . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doe 5 • When someone enters into the public record that they intend to use the property in this particular way and will continue the existing use, we are just responding to it . The request is a response to that . • Get back and get focused to the planning document and guideline . • As planners we take the best information we have at the time and apply the appropriate land use and designation. It is a pure planning function . Stamson : • That is point, this is planning for future uses . By changing it, we say Rural Residential property . If for some reason Mr. Vierling sells or loses the property, we have it designated as rural residential property . It is not the intent. • Understands Mr . Vierling wants to farm . That is great, but for planning, for some unforeseen circumstances that doesn ' t happen, we need to designate it for what it should be and Rural Residential is not what it should be. Vonhof: • Agreed with Stamson on that point. • Economic conditions can change anything . An economic slowdown could make multiple family housing become far more desirable than single family housing . If that happens, the City would have to make adjustments at the time . • This is the information today . • The plan tells people coming in what the area is going to be . It is totally appropriate if you get new information it can change . • Agreed with Stamson that a two year bandaid is not appropriate . But when someone comes in and says this is what the land is going to be, we should reflect that . It is totally appropriate to change with new information . • Stamson made very compelling arguments regarding the surrounding infrastructure and the location of the land. The overriding sense is that we now have information that is unique in the planning sense . Lemke : • Concern for people moving into the area. They go to the Comprehensive Plan and see • Rural density, then in 10 years when Mr. Vierling sells his property a business office park comes in. Those people will come back and say "why didn ' t you tell me?" Stamson : • When Mr. Vierling decides to sell, what do you think the best land use is ? Vonhof: • A lot of different things . We have to deal with the information we have now . Stamson : L:\Olftles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO22601 .doc 6 • The Commission has never used that criteria before . What we have is one landowner ' s stated intention . There are a number of scenarios that can change that . • It should reflect the Community ' s interest as a whole . What this area should be at 2020 build out . • Stamson and Vonhof discussed college land uses . • At 2020 build-out, assuming there will be more development, where that is , we don ' t know . The Comprehensive Plan should reflect where market forces are creating development. And these are the areas that the City thinks these types of uses fit into the community. • Vonhof agreed. • The fact that one particular property owner might have a different intended use does not change the fact that if his property would develop in the next 20 years that this is what the City would like the guiding vision to be . • Agree that Mr . Vierling may still be there, but designating the land agriculture reflects an accurate picture of what the developing community will look like in the future . Vonhof: • We do not know what the future will be . But this Plan does not go beyond 2020 . What we are talking about is amending the existing Plan based on the information provided today . • If I were buying property around there I would want accurate information for the surrounding area. It will significantly impact 20 years . A petition was presented to staff. Atwood : • Can the record reflect Commissioner Criego ' s previous vote? Kansier said the City Council will have all the minutes and testimony that occurred. MOTION BY STAMSON, TO PASS ALONG THIS ITEM TO COUNCIL WITH NO RECOMMENDATION. Motion dies for lack of a second . MOTION BY ATWOOD , SECOND BY VONHOF, TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE VIERLING PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 23 AND 24 , TOWNSHIP 11 , RANGE 22 . Vote taken indicated ayes by Atwood and Vonhof, nays by Stamson and Lemke . Motion dies . MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY LEMKE, TO PASS THIS ITEM ALONG TO CITY COUNCIL WITH NO RECOMMENDATION. L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doe 7 Atwood : Questioned why can' t the Motion could not go to the City Council as 2 to 2 vote . Stamson : There should be a record for the City Council . Three Motions have failed. It doesn' t move along until the Commission moves the recommendation forward. Kansier said this goes before the City Council on March 19 , 2001 . This matter will not be a public hearing . Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . Stamson said the community needs to look at all farmland and take a look at treating it differently. There is no language to protect farmland in the Ordinance . A recess was called at 7 : 21 p .m. The meeting reconvened at 7 : 37 p .m . to item 4C . B . Case Files #01 - 005 & 006 Pavek Family Investments Company/Hodgson Trust is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Plat to be known as Regal Crest to allow a cluster townhouse development consisting of 25 . 58 acres to be subdivided into 78 lots for townhouse units on the property located on the west side of CSAR 21 approximately 1/4 mile north of CSAR 82 . (Continued from the February 12, 2001 meeting) Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier stated this meeting was continued from the February 12 , 2001 , meeting to allow the developer time to address a number of issues that the staff felt were outstanding. One of the issues had to do with drainage and the Watershed District requirement . Kansier was told by the applicant today they had met with the Watershed District and they need to make some revisions to their plans . For that purpose the applicant is requesting a continuation to the March 12 , 2001 meeting . MOTION BY ATWOOD , SECOND BY STAMSON, TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO MARCH 12 , 2001 . Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . C . Case File #01 -003 Shamrock Development has submitted an application for a Preliminary Plat known as The Wilds South consisting of 77. 19 acres to be subdivided into141 single family lots . This property is located on the south side of Wilds Parkway and the north side of County Road 82 . Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated February 26 , 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planner . Shamrock Development has applied for a Preliminary Plat for the property located on the north side of CSAH 82 , on the south side of Wilds Parkway and west of Orion Road. L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doc 8 i City Council Meeting Minutes March 19 , 2001 FRIEDGES : Discussed the shelter structures at Lakefront including the pavilion with its porch , the upper lot shelter , one shelter is still recommended for construction , and a gazebo is proposed in 2003 CIP . BOYLES : Asked if there was any sort of roof or awning planned for the arbor to provide some shade . FRIEDGES : Advised that the issue could be looked into , but nothing is planned . ERICSON : Noted that the band shelter is also slated for completion this year. OSMUNDsoN : Noted the staff is currently working on the CIP for 2002 -2006 and items can be added or changed at that point as well . MOTION BY ZIESKA , SECOND BY GUNDLACH , APPROVING RESOLUTION 01 -29 RELATING TO PICNIC SHELTER CONSTRUCTION IN 2001 AND CHANGING THE LOCATION OF PICNIC SHELTER CONSTRUCTION FROM THAT PROPOSED IN THE 2001 -2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM . VOTE : Ayes Mader, Gundlach , Petersen , Ericson and Zieska , the motion carried . The Council took a brief recess . V I �� Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing Amendment to the Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan to Amend Land Use Map for 320 Acres Located at Sections 23 and 24, Township 115, Range 22 from R-HD and C-BO to Rural Density. KANSIER : Discussed the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request in connection with the staff report , discussing each of the issues raised by the applicants , including but not limited to the applicant' s ability to farming the property , the tax advantages of the Ag Preserve program , the City' s ability to provide services to the site , and protection from eminent domain . MADER : Reminded the Council that tonight' s action is not a public hearing , noting that the public hearing process was conducted at the Planning Commission level . Commented that both the Planning Commission and Councilmembers have been under considerable pressure by the public due to significant misinformation that has been circulated , and discussed some of the inaccurate statements circulated . Commented that staff has done an excellent job putting the facts back into perspective so the Council 's decision can be based upon the specific criteria . Discussed the resolutions proposed by staff and the options before the Council . MOTION BY PETERSEN , SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 01 -30 DENYING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24 , TOWNSHIP 115 , RANGE 22 . GUNDLACH : Commented on his personal meeting with Mike and Becky Vierling and the snowballing effect with misinformation that was initiated by the applicant' s own counsel . Based upon the facts in this issue and the criteria for making the decision , determined that he would support a motion to deny the request . PETERSEN : Discussed how there was relatively no tax impact for the property by the Ag Preserve program and could not support granting the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan . 6 3 City Council Meeting Minutes March 19 , 2001 ERICSON : Commented that he has been on both sides of the issue , and believes that the $468 does not show appreciable benefit to even consider a Comprehensive Plan amendment . Further noted that the City does not have any plans for the property and that its development is in the hands of the owner. ZIESKA : Believes that much of this issue has been about emotion , but that when considering the facts does not believe there is justification for amending the Comprehensive Plan . Discussed another instance in which the Comprehensive Plan was changed for property on the northeast corner of County Road 18 and County Road 42 , where the land was changed from residential to commercial - office park . The land is directly across the street from the Vierling property and changing the designation to commercial has not affected how those property owners enjoy or use their property . The only benefit appears to be a $468 tax savings . Supported the motion to deny the request . KANSIER: Reviewed the criteria by which the City considers Comprehensive Plan Amendments , including the goals and objectives listed in the Comprehensive Plan , the purpose of the proposed designation , and the development location criteria for the proposed designation . MASER : Commented on the various attitudes expressed at the public hearing in connection with the criteria and noted that the Comprehensive Plan is a long -term vision for the City and defines the City's expectation for the future . Discussed a statement made by the applicant's attorney that if the request was granted , the applicant would move to remove the property from the Ag Preserve program in two years . Did not believe that was the purpose of a long -term planning document . Commented that one of the criteria for putting land into the rural designation would be if there was not water or sewer available . In this case , there is sewer and water available directly in front of the property . [Staff confirmed] . Also discussed that the traffic flows on that street by state standards are well below capacity . Further stated that there is no action that this Council is considering that would preclude the Vierlings from continuing to farm the land . [Staff confirmed] Referred to some statements made by the applicant's attorney that the City intended to develop the site for public buildings . [Staff confirmed that there were no plans in place for City development of the property] . Asked the City Attorney if there is anything in the application or the supporting documentation that would indicate that the City Council would be acting inappropriately . PACE : Advised that based upon the comments from the Councilmembers and the staff report , and assuming that the views of the staff report are consistent with the view of the Council , the designation in the Comprehensive Plan appears to be appropriate . MASER : Asked if the Comprehensive Plan already in place reflects the previous desires of the property owner. Also asked for clarification that the responsibility for verifying a change in the Comprehensive Plan rests with the applicant . KANSIER: Advised that in 1993 , the Vierling applied to remove this site from the Ag Preserve program and when the Comprehensive Plan was updated in 1995 , the future designation was based upon the fact that the owners did intend to remove it . PACE : Advised that the issue of responsibility for demonstrating a change to the Comprehensive Plan is a legal standard borne by the applicant. MASER : Did not believe that any of the information presented by the applicant's attorney provided any plausible justification for the Comprehensive Plan amendment under the criteria . Supported the motion to deny the application . 7 City Council Meeting Minutes March 19 , 2001 GUNDLACH : Agreed with the conclusion from the staff report and read verbatim (page 7, second bullet) regarding the purpose of the Comprehensive Plan . Further commented that the Comprehensive Plan use was appropriate . MADER: Asked staff to clarify if the information submitted by the applicant's attorney regarding the MUSA. KANSIER: Explained the undesignated or floating MUSA concept which includes this property in the primary allocation area and there is approval from the Met Council to provide utilities . MADER: Asked if there was any other land in Prior Lake enrolled in the Ag Preserve program . KANSIER: Advised that there were approximately 40 acres near Howard Lake , where it is impractical in the foreseeable future to extend utilities . VOTE : Ayes by Mader, Gundlach , Petersen , Ericson and Zieska , the motion carried . The Council took a brief recess . Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving the Preliminary Plat to be Known as The Wilds South. KANSIER: Briefly reviewed the project in connection with the staff report. MADER: Asked if all the details of the plan meet the City' s ordinances . KANSIER: Advised that the preliminary plat does meet all the City's zoning and subdivision ordinances , or will with minor modifications . MOTION BY E PR �MINARYOND BY PETERSEN PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS TOH WL DOVE S SOUTHSOLUTION 01 -31 APPROVING THE ERICSON : Commented that he liked the size of the lots and this type of development , and would like to see more of this type of development . ZIEsKA: Asked about how difficult snowplowing will be with the center islands in the cul -de-sacs . OSMUNDSON : Advised that it isn 't an ideal situation , but that staff was comfortable with the proposal . VOTE : Ayes by Mader, Gundlach , Petersen , Ericson and Zieska , the motion carried . nfurn on on and Consider s in OrdeotoaAll Interim theOrdinance Imposing a C y to Study the Treatment of Such Uses in 'the Contextnof Operations m Ord Zoning. MADER : Explained the purpose of the agenda item and the need for further study on this item . Also noted that this item would not affect the conditional use permit granted to Ryan Contracting . 8 PR -10 ti y U � �-tVNESO � F. RESOLUTION 01 =30 RESOLUTION DENYING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24, TOWNSHIP 115 , RANGE 22 MOTION BY : PETERSEN SECOND BY : GUNDLACH RECITALS WHEREAS , The City of Prior Lake received an application for an amendment to the City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the R- HD ( High Density Residential ) designation and the C- BO ( Business Office Park ) designation to the Rural Density designation for the property legally described as follows : The Southwest 1/4 of Section 2 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County , Minnesota ; and WHEREAS , legal notice of the public hearing was duly published and mailed in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and Prior Lake City Code ; and WHEREAS , The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 , for those interested in this request to present their views ; and WHEREAS , The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to February 12 , 2001 , to allow consideration of additional information and testimony ; and WHEREAS , The Planning Commission closed the public hearing on February12 , 2001 ; and WHEREAS , On February 26 , 2001 , the Planning Commission adopted a motion to send this request to the City Council without a recommendation ; and WHEREAS , On March 19 , 2001 , the Prior Lake City Council considered the proposed amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change the designation of the above described property to the Rural Density designation and ; WHEREAS , The City Council received the minutes of the Planning Commission meetings along with the staff reports and other information ; and WHEREAS , the City Council has carefully considered the testimony , staff reports and other pertinent information contained in the record of decision of this case . r:\resoluti\planres\2001 \01 -30. doc Pa e 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 447 -4230 / ax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER NOW THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE , MINNESOTA , that: 1 . The above recitals are herein fully incorporated herein as set forth above . 2 . The City Council hereby adopts the following findings of fact: (a ) The burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that the Comprehensive Plan designation is in error and that a change is justified . ( b ) The applicants have failed to demonstrate that the current Comprehensive Plan designations of R- HD ( High Density Residential ) and C- BO ( Business Office Park) are inappropriate and that it should be changed . ( c) The current Comprehensive Plan designations and zoning of the property do not preclude the continued use of the property for agricultural purposes . (d ) There has not been a material change in the area or conditions affecting the site since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1999 . 3 . The proposed amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to designate the above described property as Rural Density is hereby denied . Passed and adopted this 19`h day of March , 2001 . YES NO Mader X Mader Ericson X Ericson Gundlach X Gundlach Petersen X Petersen Zieska X Zieska � IAJ L {Seal} Frank Boil , Cit M ager City of Pri r e r:\resoluti\planes\2001 \01 -30. doc Page 2 Original Reports �� anninJe 'QizPcA - I — Im - o1 eptann :11 Rzpol-F a - ale - of � I � n �nyPupo ,� a - ia - o � (� Councikf�yendwQepm4 3 - 19 - 01 0� PRION ti y v � M� n' NESp'S PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM : 4C SUBJECT : CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE VIERLING PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 249 TOWNSHIP 115 , RANGE 22 (Case File #00- 084) PRESENTER: JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR PUBLIC HEARING : _X_ YES NO-N/A DATE : JANUARY 16, 2001 INTRODUCTION : Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling have filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C -BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land . BACKGROUND : This property is presently zoned A (Agricultural) . The east 160 acres of the site are designated as C-BO (Business Office Park) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map , and the west 160 acres of the site is designated as R-HD (High Density Residential) . The applicants have requested these designations be changed to Rural Density. PHYSICAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Total Site Area : The total site consists of approximately 320 acres . Topography : The site has a varied topography. The western portion of the site generally drains towards Pike Lake, on the west . The remainder of the site drains to several small wetlands scattered on the acreage . Vegetation : This property has been cropland for several years , although some portions of the site are wooded . Wetlands : The site is subject to the provisions of the State Wetland Conservation Act . I :\00files\00compam\00-084\00084pc .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 Existing Use : The property is used for agricultural purposes . There is a farmstead and outbuildings located in the southwest corner of the site . Access : Access to this property is presently from Pike Lake Trail , Utilities : Sewer and water services must be extended from the existing services located in CSAR 42 to serve this site. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning : To the north of this property is agricultural land, currently zoned R-S (Rural Subdivision) and designated for Urban Low to Medium Density Residential uses . Also to the north is property located within the City of Savage . To the south, across CSAH 42 , are residential subdivisions, zoned R4 and designated as R-L/MD . To the east are several large lots with single family dwellings , zoned A and designated as C-BO and as R-L/MD . To the west are large lots zoned A and designated as R-HD and R-L/MD . MUSA Designation : This property is currently outside of the MUSA boundary. However, this property is consistent with the criteria for the extension of MUSA as listed in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan (see attached) . The property has also been designated as part of the Primary MUSA in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Properties within the Primary MUSA meet the criteria for the extension of services . ANALYSIS : The applicants have requested the amendment to Rural Density on this property. The application does not include any reasoning for this request . The Rural Density classification is intended for land where urban services are unavailable . Even this designation is intended to accommodate future urban development. The Vierling property is currently enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program . This program was established in 1980 to preserve long-term agricultural areas in the Metropolitan area, and to recognize farmland as a long-term use . Under the law, land is no longer eligible for the program when the Comprehensive Plan no longer identifies the land for long-term agricultural uses . In 1993 , the property owner initiated the removal of the east 240 acres of the site from the program . The land will be officially removed in 2001 . The Comprehensive Plan designation for this area was first amended in 1995 , and identified this property as R-HD , C-BO and PI (Planned Industrial) . In 1999, the plan was updated following a public hearing. At that time, this property was designated for R- HD and C-BO uses . 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00084pc.doc Page 2 In 2000, the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program . The City refused this request on the basis the property no longer qualified for program participation. The City has no objection to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax protection for existing farmland . The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners . The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term agriculture has been in place since 1995 . The applicants have not demonstrated any need to change this designation. ALTERNATIVES : 1 . Recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment as requested. 2 . Recommend denial of the request. 3 . Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission RECOMMENDATION : The Planning staff recommends Alternative #2 . ACTION REQUIRED : A motion and second to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Rural Density designation is required. EXHIBITS : 1 . Location Map 2 . MUSA Expansion Criteria 3 . Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map 4 . Primary MUSA Map 5 . Zoning Map 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00084pe .doe Page 3 O� PR ,to ti y U � r1Ij �, NESp'C P PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM : 4A SUBJECT : CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE VIERLING PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 249 TOWNSHIP 115 , RANGE 22 (Case File #00-084) PRESENTER . JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR PUBLIC HEARING : _X_ YES NO -N/A DATE . FEBRUARY 26, 2001 Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling have filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAR 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C -BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land . The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 . At that meeting, the applicants ' representatives distributed a packet of information . The Planning Commission continued the public hearing in order to review this information . On February 12 , 2001 , the Planning Commission reopened the public hearing to consider this additional information as well as additional testimony. Following the testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and discussed this request . After considerable discussion, the Planning Commission considered a motion to approve this request . This motion failed on a 2-2 vote . The Planning Commission also considered a motion to deny this request . Again, the motion failed on a 2 -2 vote . Rather than send this item to the City Council without a recommendation, the Commission tabled action on the request until February 26 , 2001 . No new information has been submitted . Unless the Planning Commission feels further testimony is warranted, it is not necessary to reopen the public hearing . ALTERNATIVES : 1 . Recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment as requested . 2 . Recommend denial of the request. 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00084pc3 .doc Page I 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 447 -4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 3 . Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission RECOMMENDATION : The Planning staff recommends Alternative #2 . ACTION REQUIRED : A motion and second to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Rural Density designation is required. EXHIBITS : 1 . Copy of Minutes of January 16 , 2001 Planning Commission Meeting 2 . Copy of Draft Minutes of February 12 , 2001 Planning Commission Meeting 1 :\OOfiles\00compam\00-084\00084pc3 .doc Page 2 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 C . Case File #00-084 The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in Sections 23 and 24 , Township 115, Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density. Vonhof stated the Commissioners just received information submitted by the applicant and will not have time to review. However, testimony would be taken by the public and most likely the hearing will continue to the next meeting . Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated January 16 , 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling have filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land . This property is presently zoned A (Agricultural) . The east 160 acres of the site are designated as C-BO (Business Office Park) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, and the west 160 acres of the site is designated as R-HD (High Density Residential) . The applicants have requested these designations be changed to Rural Density. The total site consists of approximately 320 acres and has been cropland for several years , although some portions of the site are wooded. The property is used for agricultural purposes . There is a farmstead and outbuildings located in the southwest corner of the site . Also, the site is subject to the provisions of the State Wetland Conservation Act. In 2000 , the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program . The City refused this request on the basis the property no longer qualified for program participation . The City has no objection to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax protection for existing farmland. The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners . The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term agriculture has been in place since 1995 . The applicants have not demonstrated any need to change this designation . Staff recommended denial of the request. Comments from the public : Attorney Patrick Kelly, Kelly & Fawcett Law Firm, 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza, St. Paul, representing the applicants , stated the property does not qualify for the Agriculture Preserve Program is because of the Comprehensive Plan . Kelly said land under the R-HD zoning equates to 30 units per acre . Kelly believes his calculations would be 4, 000 to 5 , 000 units with the 160 acre parcel . This is not part of the MUSA. They studied the area dealing with L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 6 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 well system issues . When and if the Vierlings decide to rezone , the City ' s infrastructure would be impacted. The Vierlings have been farming this property for 150 years . As part of the operation the Vierlings utilize approximately 170 acres on County Roads 42 and 21 . They also have 55 acres on Prior Lake . If the operation is shut down they will have no choice but to develop . Stamson pointed out the City is not asking for the amendment, the Vierlings are . Kelly felt by amending the Comprehensive Plan the City has knocked out the farming process . If they are out of the Ag Preserve they will be piece-mealing the development. Sections of 20 or 30 acres will become office park or commercial . This is a contradiction in reality, normally developers come in and want to put 4,000 or 5 ,000 units or 3 story office buildings . The Vierlings are asking the City to put them back in the Ag Preserve and farm . It is an 8 year period . With the Ag Preserve Plan they will maintain farming . It is a benefit of open space for the community . Their farming is a profitable operation. Stamson pointed out the Vierlings initiated the 240 acres removal out of the Ag Preserve two years prior to the City changing the Comprehensive Plan. Kelly said at that time, Helen Vierling ' s husband Leo was running the farm and there were other issues going on in the City of Prior Lake . Leo chose not to re-enroll but he figured he had this 8 year window to take a look at it and see what was going on with development. Leo passed away in 1995 and his wish was to continue farming with his son, Michael . Michael has been successful and this is the direction the family would like to go . Most cities are striving for open space and the Vierlings are trying to accomplish that. Stamson referenced the staff report suggesting the alternative of Green Acres . Kelly said it does not do what the Ag Preserve does . Kelly then summarized the Ag Preserve definition . (473H . 01 Minnesota Statutes) . Stamson clarified the benefits of the Ag Preserve : • Better tax advantages • Protected from eminent domain • Special Assessments • Zoning Conflicts Stamson asked Kelly what Ag Preserve does not do . Kelly responded it involves a tax-type situation where it allows deferring assessments as soon as the farming operation ends . With Ag Preserve, the cities can act different ways through the power of zoning . If the farmer is in the Ag Preserve he does not have to worry about the headaches of conflict with the best intentions of the city. Green Acres does not protect like the Ag Preserve . Kelly went on to say there has been correspondence back and forth with the City of Prior Lake since February of 1999 . Atwood questioned if the remaining 110 acres are part of the Ag Preserve . Kelly responded it was part of the operation of the farm, but there is a drainage problem with the lake property. It is zoned office/commercial on the corner of County Roads 41 and 21 . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO11601 .doc 7 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 Lemke questioned what governmental body approves the Ag Preserve . Kelly responded once the City okays it, it is reviewed by the County and ultimately approved by the Met Council . McDermott clarified there is trunk sewer and water along County Road 42 and this area . When the County Road 42 and Pike Lake construction started a few years ago , there were crossings put in to the north side of County Road 42 . She stated she would be happy to provide Mr. Kelly with the plans . Stamson asked if there were any other designations besides Rural Residential that would allow Ag Preserve . Kansier answered there was not. Comments from the public : Mike Vierling, 13985 Pike Lake Trail, thanked his neighbors for the support . Vierling said people ask him why he just doesn ' t pack up his bags and go somewhere else . Sometimes money does not buy happiness . He does not want to farm anywhere else . It wouldn ' t be the same . Vierling explained some of the problems he will have if he is not in the Ag Preserve . He would like to see his sons have the opportunity to farm just like his Dad gave him. The neighbors love the open spaces . He knows he will eventually be forced out. Pretty soon there is going to houses everywhere . He wants to run the farm like a business . He can ' t do that unless he is in the Ag Preserve program and asks for the City ' s support. What is 8 years down the line? Even if he wanted to sell it would take years get it right. Stamson questioned Vierling if 8 years is a long enough period to justify the improvements he would like to make . Is it enough? Vierling said it was and went on to say he does not want to put in any improvements until he knows what is going on. Lucy Vierling Cunningham, stated the family has been farming for many years and are dedicated to the farm . This is not the time to sell . She has a family, works full time and still works on the farm . Dan Klamm, 4130 140th Street NE, has known the Vierlings for 15 years and felt it was great to see the farm exist for 150 years . Eight years is not long . Maybe the City has had disagreements with the Vierlings but the community should come together on this issue . Paul Lindahl , 2560 Muhlenhardt Road, felt the farm is a beautiful setting. The Vierlings are asking for help . It is hard for a farmer to ask for assistance . It seems like such a minor thing, at least give them a chance . They have done a lot for the community. Russ Dunker, 4487 Chestnut Lane, said he does not know the Vierlings well but sees Mike a few times a year. Mike has a real passion for what he does . Dunker felt it was not unreasonable for the Vierlings to want the tax advantages . He is in support of the Vierlings farming for as long as they want. They are very good neighbors . Rita Baden, 13866 Pike Lake Trail , questioned how farm land is taken out of rural density when it is being farmed . Why does the community feel they can make these changes? If the Vierlings are willing to farm, let them make the choice . We are losing our open space . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO11601 .doc 8 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 Kansier explained the zoning is still agriculture and farming is a permitted use . The Vierlings can continue to farm as long as they like . The Comprehensive Plan is a long term plan to identify potential uses of property to allow the City, County and the rest of the community to plan for things like municipal services , road systems , the park systems, including the farm land . The City has no intention of stopping the Vierlings from farming . The City is required to plan long term. The zoning has not changed and the City is not requesting the amendment. Kansier clarified the 8 years in Ag Preserve . Once the property is in the Ag Preserve Program it does not come out until requested by the property owner. Once they make the request the 8 year time frame starts . It is not just 8 years , it will go on until the law changes . Kevin Shadduck, 4841 Beach Street, said the Vierlings have been great neighbors . The only reason not to help the Vierlings farm is to perceive that the City wants to force them to sell so the City can get a bigger tax base . It is a terrible motivation not to help a farmer. Joe Zieska, 5316 Hampton, said he has looked out his window the last 14 years to see the Vierling property and if they desire to farm for the next 100 or 200 years they can . But that is not the issue . The property is zoned agriculture . He doesn ' t believe in the history of Prior Lake (inaudible) . To paraphrase Mr. Kelly we have to look at this logically from the facts . First I would like to straighten out a few facts from Mr. Kelly. He stated the property was zoned RHD (Rural High Density) — it is not. It is zoned Agriculture . The Comprehensive Plan is RHD and CBO . He mentioned building 4 , 500 housing units on the land. The City only has 3 ,000 houses . I don ' t see how he can put 4, 500 in that little spot. He talks about putting manufacturing and industrial in CBO . Those uses are not allowed . It has to be business office park. Kelly speculated on the needed infrastructure and traffic on County Road 42 . He talks about the breakdown of County Road 42 in Burnsville . There isn ' t anyone here that would tell us that 42 in Burnsville is broke down. That is why we need long range planning. The City has to look at what the plan could possibly be used for in the future . As the City Engineer pointed out, they oversized and put trunk sewer and water mains in to get across County Road 42 to get to Pike Lake trail projects in anticipation of future developments . It is only right for the homeowners who live adjacent to this property . Anyone who has been on the Planning Commission for any length of time finds when there is difficult rezoning problems , it is not from the land owner, it is from the adjacent property owners . When I bought my house I never knew what was going to be there . The property owners along County Roads 42 and 18 , Pike Lake Trail will sell some day or somebody else moves in and sees the beautiful farm and all of a sudden an office building goes up they ' ll say "What happened? There was a farm before . " By leaving it in the Comprehensive Plan as potential uses somewhere in the future those people who purchase that property will know potentially what can go in there . These are the reasons the Comprehensive Plan should be left as is . It has nothing to do with present day land use . Dave Baden, said the Vierlings are hard workers . The cows are good neighbors too . The open space in Prior Lake is disappearing, we need less development . He hopes the Vierlings will be farming for another 80 years, not just 8 . Linda Lehman, 13231 Henning Circle, said she has been working with the Vierlings for the past 5 years on the environmental compliance for their feedlots . Mike Vierling is looking at spending $ 35 , 000 to $ 65 ,000 to come into compliance with the feedlot . He needs to know if L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 9 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 he will be able to farm there for the next 8 to 10 years for that issue alone . Would like the Commissioners to allow him to continue not only for the cost issue but also for compliance and whatever protection he needs from the Ag Preserve . Yvonne Anderson, 13220 Pike Lake, Program Manager for the YMCA Camp and caretaker since 1982 said the Camp has been on Pike Lake since the 1960 ' s . At some time the YMCA Camp will be put into a situation of the potential land use . The 80 acres they are on allows 2 , 500 youth each summer to come and experience the outdoors . Anderson supported the Vierlings and asked the Commission to remember the green space . Cindy Stark, 14730 Rosewood Road, enjoys looking over the Vierling property and Prior Lake . The Vierling farm gives their children the opportunity to see a hard working farm. Greg Engabos, 4931 Beach Street, appreciates what the City has done in developing the Comprehensive Plan and understands proper planning . If it is the intent of the City of Prior Lake to let the Vierlings continue farming, it should be demonstrated they could be put in the best economic situation possible by allowing the Agricultural designation. Both intentions would be met. Jadin Bragg, Carriage Hills Development, said he listened to the Commissioners earlier determining if there was hardship for a deck. He said it seems ridiculous the Commissioners are pointing out they cannot change the Comprehensive Plan to let the Vierlings have what they need . It is causing them economic hardship . Think about the area you live in . Residents want to drive by a farm not high rise buildings . Bragg said he loves the fact he can see Jeffers Pond and the cows . Don ' t change it. Kenny Landherr, 14612 Rosewood Road, said from his family perspective they feel fortunate to live next to the Vierling property and was the main reason they moved there . The bigger issue is that it is a wonderful opportunity for his children to experience the farm . K.R. Radin, 14211 Shore Lane, enjoys seeing the cows and felt Mike Vierling should have the opportunity to continue farming. The hearing was closed to the public . Commissioner Vonhof stated that since the Commissioners received a large packet of material just before the meeting, they would like to continue the public hearing and give the Commissioners time to review the information . MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY CRIEGO , TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO JANUARY 29 , 2001 . Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . Stamson asked for a detailed definition of Green Acres and Ag Preserve specifically the tax details for the next packet. A recess was called at 8 : 12 p .m. The meeting reconvened at 8 : 19 p .m . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 10 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, FEBRUARY 129 2001 1 . Call to Order . Acting Chair Stamson called the February 12, 2001 , Planning Commission meeting to order at 6 : 30 p .m . Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Criego and Lemke, Stamson, Planning Director Don Rye, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, City Engineer Sue McDermott, Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2 . Roll Call : Atwood Absent* Criego Present Lemke Present Stamson Present Vonhof Absent DRAFT 3 . Approval of Minutes : The Minutes from the January 16 , 2001 , Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented . * Commissioner Atwood arrived at 6 : 32 p .m . Commissioner Stamson read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting . 4 . Public Hearings : A. Case File #00-084 (Continued) The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in Sections 23 and 24, Township 115 , Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated February 12 , 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planner. Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO21201 .doc 1 Planning Commission Meeting Februmy 12, 2001 The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing on January 16, 2001 . At that meeting, the applicants ' representatives distributed a packet of information. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing in order to review this information. The public hearing was closed at that time . The January 15 , 2001 , letter submitted by the firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P .A. , representatives of the applicants, contained several reasons they believe the Comprehensive Plan should be amended . Kansier categorically contested each item listed in their letter. In 2000, the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program . The City refused this request on the basis the property no longer qualified for program participation because it failed to meet the statutory requirements . The current Comprehensive Plan designation of the property does not preclude the use of this land for agricultural purposes . The City has no objection to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax protection for existing farmland. The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners . The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency submitted a letter dated February 1 , 2001 indicating a long history with the applicant on water quality runoff issues . The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term agriculture has been in place since 1995 . The applicants have not demonstrated any need to change this designation . Staff recommended denial of the request. Questions from the Commissioners : Criego : • Questioned why only 240 acres out of the 320 acres are being asked to change. Kansier said the request includes all 320 acres . The 240 acres are what the Vierlings initiated for removal . • Why would the remaining acreage have to be requested . Kansier responded it was still in the Ag Preserve Program. But it no longer meets the statutory requirements . The City has taken no steps to initiate removal of that property. • If the City would take action it would probably take 8 years ? Kansier said it was her understanding the City would have to adopt a resolution stating initiation of removal and it would take 8 years before it actually came out. • Questioned the tax issues and the City' s ability to take over property as well as enforce ordinances in the area. Kansier explained the public projects relating to the Ag Preserve Ordinance. • Criego and Stamson recapped the definition. • Questioned State regulations from the PCA. L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 2 Planning Commission Meeting Februaty 12, 2001 Comments from the Public : Jim Sullivan, Enforcement Project Leader for the Southeast District of the State, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, MPGA, 520 Lafayette Road, St . Paul, MN 55155 , stated the environmental issues came up in 1996 when the MPCA was first made aware of the discharge issue . The Agency and Vierlings have made some effort to address some of the issues . Sullivan said he did not want to make excuses as to why the issue has not been resolved, but there has been administrative process related to enforcement issues . They are downsizing government and the Agency has been reorganized. MPCA is looking for assurance that the discharge from the facility does not exceed State Water Quality Standards . The other option is a no discharge facility under the Federal Rules . The agency is currently negotiating with the farm to address the issues and set a corrective action plan within the next month. Criego asked if the property was in the Ag Preserve Program would the MPCA have the same rights to impose . Sullivan responded that it had no impact on their ability to regulate . The Ag Program is not a program they administer. He went on to say on the Federal level, that there are a number of grant program to help farmers . Sullivan said he is not aware of the affects of the City ' s Comprehensive Plan, the District Conservationists for the NRCS could answer that better. Criego questioned if the land was in Ag Preserve, would the regulations referred to still apply. Sullivan said "Absolutely, the MPCA regulations still stand" . Being in the Ag Program may not help with the funding . Commissioner Stamson re-opened the public hearing . ; p Comments from the Public : Attorney Patrick Kelly of Kelly & Fawcett Law Firm in St . Paul, representing the Vierlings , said the key issue is that the City Planners are representing no plans of rezoning . The Vierlings are asking for purposes of the farm operation to allow them to go into the Ag Preserve , The Vierlings want to continue farming and have no plans to rezone . It is important to allow the farming operation to continue. They have an 8 year plan and the Ag Preserve allows farming without intrusion from local regulations . Michael Vierling, 13985 Pike Lake Trail, said his farm produces soybeans and milk. In 1976 the State of Minnesota certified the Vierling farm as a century farm . There are State programs to protect the land from 10 to 30 years . Vierling said he did not want to put money into the operation and two years later have the City come and take his land. He has to improve the feedlot . At the last meeting the neighbors said they wanted the Vierlings to farm. The Constitution said there should be freedom. Vierling felt it was not fair he should loose out on all the programs just because he lives in Prior Lake . The City is saying it is ready to develop . He would like to continue farming at least 10 years until he knows what his kids want to do . If he continues farming for 10 years, the 2020 Plan will still be 10 years away. That is why his Dad took the land out of Ag Preserve because L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO21201 .doe 3 Planning Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 you don ' t know what the future is going to be . Vierling quoted the Prior Lake American quoted the City, Mayor Wes Mader and a neighbor. He said he felt if the City doesn' t let his family farm with his kids, you might as well get a machine gun and blow everyone away. Gary Matson, 4584 Hummingbird Trail, lived in Prior Lake two years, said everyone is taken away by the beauty of the Vierling farm . He hopes that carries some weight. Dan Klamm, 4130 140th Street, said his family fought for this Country, it bothers him to see how this piece of America and history is goes down . It bothers him that the Ag Preserve gives the City the power to stop whatever makes the Vierling farm go . Klamm told the Commissioners to give it to the Vierlings, turn the cheek and help them farm . People move to Prior Lake for recreation, quality of life, quality people, a good time and a community that cares for one another. Kimbel R. Raden, 14211 Shore Lane, does not know what Council members like or dislike the farms . People who like the farm probably had relatives on the farm and probably had to actually go out and work for a days living. The people who don ' t like farms would rather slip a gas station here or there or on somebody else . They ' re not really telling anybody what is going on because they know how to make a little more money for the City. He stated he understands making money for the City. One of the reasons he moved to the City is because of Mike and Becky' s farm . Radin is from a farm background and military background and comes from a hardworking family. He totally respects anyone who goes out and works day in and day out . When it is up to a group of people to decide to decide for a man or woman for their kids ' fate not to be able to carry on what they want to do . He felt every citizen in Prior Lake should know who hates the open spaces and farms . Then we know who we ' re up against. It is good for everybody. Raden felt the Commissioners should side with the farm . The public hearing was closed . a Comments from the Commissioners : Criego : • It is hard to fight the issue of having or not having a farm. I would love to see the farm another 300 years . It is not the issue . I would love to have open land all around. Prior Lake is growing . How do we grow sensibly without causing hardship for individuals? Prior Lake is a small community and limited for growth. • The question is, do we want to grow the City any larger than it is now? The 2020 Comprehenisve Plan does say that we need to grow and we will grow based on various input from the citizens of Prior Lake . There have been many meetings on the Comprehensive Plan and they address all these issues before us tonight. Do we all agree? Obviously not . • Would I like to have many more farms ? Absolutely. • Is it possible long term? Probably not. L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 4 Planning Commission Meeting Febmaty 12, 2001 • I would love to slow the process . The one thing that comes back to me . Not against the Ag Preserve Program if it has benefits for the Vierling family. • Concern is that once it goes back to Ag Preserve . It could stay that way for another 150 years to 300 years . Is that really what the citizens of Prior Lake want . • This is an emotional issue . • Not clear after all the testimony from Mr. Kelly and the City what the true benefit of the Ag Preserve Program other than it leaves control within the family . Which we all know in 1993 the family decided to pull out of the Ag Preserve . It was not the City nor the citizens decision, it was the Vierling ' s decision. • I believe there was a logical reason Mr. Vierling did that. We do not know what Mr. Vierling saw. • If I could get a guaranty of 8 to 10 years, I would be more than happy to agree . But the fact is once it goes back to preserve it could be locked up forever. Stamson : • Don' t come up and point your finger and say you are going to force them off the farm after you just moved in to a new house on somebody else ' s farm . People have to realize the decisions made affect somebody. It is not the City who is the bad guy here, the City is responding to what is going on in the community. • Prior Lake is a growing community and we have these issues before us . The City is responding not initiating this issue . • Agreed with Criego , the farm is an asset to the community . The issue is not that the City wants the farm. • The Comprehensive Plan is long term . The realty is this community will not be rural in 2020, regardless of the actions taken today. What the City is saying is if the Vierlings decide to sell, and someone decides to develop, the City would like the land use to be Business Office Park and high density. The decision to sell is entirely up to Mr. Vierling . • There has to be some type of plan that drives the City in the future to say here is what we want the City to look like, so it is an efficient and an attractive City at the time it is built . Otherwise it will end up haphazard like cities out east that develop without this type of planning . • I downloaded information from the State and read through Agriculture Preserve which repeats over and over again, is long term farm uses . Their idea of long term is 8 years to get it out. Their idea of long term is a minimum of 8 . • Mr. Veirling stated he would like to farm 8 to 10 years . He will not be forced out. The marketing conditions in this area are not going to force him off in that amount of time . The surrounding cities and suburbs will more likely attract developers before Prior Lake . It is not in demand . • The idea of Ag Preserve was not to cut a deal for a few years . The program stresses long term farming. Even Mr. Vierling stated it is not his intent. He is looking at 10 years . That is not the intention of the Ag Preserve program . • The issue is what the Comp Plan does and what it needs to be . Rural residential was designed for area where there are no services available to allow agriculture uses for a longer term, maybe 30 or 40 years . This is not appropriate for this place . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminotes\mn021201 .doc 5 Planning Commission Meeting Febmaty 12, 2001 • The feeling of the Commissioners and Council five years ago and when the Comprehensive Plan was recently update the idea was this area will develop 15 to 20 years out. • The uses are appropriate . Cannot support changes . Lemke : • Agreed with the comments from the Commissioners . It is an emotional issue . What we are talking about is not what the land is going to be used for tomorrow . It is zoned Agriculture, tomorrow it will be agriculture. We are talking about somewhere in the future . If the land is developed what will it look like . • I wouldn ' t be truthful or honest to say 20 or 30 years down the road that it will still be agriculture . • Anyone else moving out here has the right to look at a Comprehensive Plan and know what the future of that land will look like . • Mr. Vierling and his attorney, Mr. Kelly stated the land will be developed some day. • Will not support changing the existing designation of the Comprehensive Plan. Atwood : • Couldn ' t agree more on an emotionally charged issue . • Is rural density appropriate? Kansier explained the designation and the services . • If the Comprehensive Plan is amended, what is the process and the cost for the City? Kansier explained the process — two ways it could be amended again. The City would do an update of the plan. The costs are staff time, publications, public hearing notices , hearing costs and fiscal money costs . The other option would be for the property owner to file an amendment, the process is the same — go before the Planning Commission and then the final decision is made by the City Council . The filing fees generally do not cover the full cost of the process . The cost if initiated by the City is paid by the taxpayers . • Time frame? Kansier said it can take 45 to 90 days depending on meeting schedules . • The Metropolitan Council needs to approve all Comp Plan Amendments . • The Planning Commission is an advisory committee who makes a recommendation to the City Council . • What does it look like to the citizens of Prior Lake if the Comp Plan is amended? Kansier explained it gives residents and others who move here an idea of what the plan will be through the year 2020 . The document can be changed . • Nobody will come in and take the Vierling farm a minute after 2020 . Some people see this as a threat of taking the farm . • See no reason not to let them apply for the Ag Preserve program. • There are two sides to everything. Does not see a burden on the City to change the Comp Plan. • Would like to see the Vierlings step up to the plate and pay the costs . • If this does not pass, the Commission does not make the final decision, no one is trying to take away the beautiful farm . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO21201 .doc 6 Planning Commission Meeting Febmaty 12, 2001 Criego : • Missing something, a month ago , the taxes were one of the big issues . The Vierlings claimed it was a tax problem if it was not in Ag Preserve . That is not so . • Two things are coming across . One is the fear the City is going to do something that would inhibit you from farming . The second concern is putting up any accessory structures because of requests the City might require . • The MPCA says they are trying to help the Vierlings to not pollute the water and there is some funding available to help . The only thing I can put my finger on is fear of the City taking over some of the property. • Mike Vierling said "Just look at what the City did to the Mendens and Kops . Look what they had to do to fight. The Kops lost their farm. I ' m the only one left . The Jeffers farm is going to be developed. The City took their farms away. The City is always looking for parks , fire stations, whatever. Why should I put in thousands of dollars into that feedlot and like the MPCA said if I don ' t get into the Ag Preserve Program I won ' t get no funding. Why should I put all the money in? What is the difference in the Zoning? The City can take it out tomorrow . " • Kansier responded the City could not take it out unless the Comprehensive Plan was amended . • Why would the City amend it now then turn around and amend it again? Itf " .. doesn' t make sense . In • Vierling asked if the City could guarantee 10 years ? • The concern is what could happen is that the kids and their kids want to continue farming and more power to them . At least in the Comprehensive Plan • We as citizens have seen what happens when a City tries to take over land . There is a huge outcry and there should be . There is no intent of takeover of the farm . It is up to the Vierlings if they want to develop the property. • Vierling questioned what would happen if he guaranteed he would take it out in 10 years . • Kansier pointed out Mr. Vierling ' s intentions are good but probably not legal . It would be provisional contract zoning which is illegal in the State . The City would have to talk to the City Attorney. • Mr. Kelly said he was a City Attorney for a number of cities in the metropolitan area and stated agreements could be made in unique situations like this and amend the Comprehensive Plan at any time . The City is under the obligation under the 2020 plan to re-look at the Comprehensive Plan. Kelly said the Vierlings can give the City a guarantee in 10 years they are going to be out farming . They want the 10 years to allow the farming use based on their land use experts and engineers . The Ag Preserve gives the Vierlings all the things they want to do . • Do we (Commissioners) need legal advice on the 10 year agreement? Kansier said they would. • Can the Commissioners pass a recommendation to City Council with certain conditions and let City Council and the legal staff decide if it is appropriate? Kansier said there is nothing stopping the Commission from making a recommendation. L:\Olfilcs\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doe 7 Planning Commission Meeting Februay 12, 2001 Stamson : • Opposed to that approach, it is bad government . This is a long term planning document . The idea for government is to treat the community as a whole and look out for the entire community ' s best interest . The drive is to direct development further out . This would happen all over the City if that if that is agreed to . • Agree it is a tough decision. Criego : • The Comp Plan is known for a long range plan, do not see any problem modifying the plan . Stamson : • It should be modified on situations that are changing to alter the long term plans . We can ' t make long term plans reflect short term goals . That is not the way to do it . Atwood : • Questioned Criego why 10 years makes him feel better? Criego responded if there is no time limit it can be farmed for the next 300 years . That is detrimental to the City of Prior Lake . To have the City give up that right at this point is not a proper judgment. The proper judgment would be to give the citizens and the Vierlings what they need. And if that is 10 years more power to them . That doesn ' t mean they have to stop farming, it just comes out of the Ag Preserve . • Questioned Criego why he felt if the Vierlings farmed another 10 years it would be detrimental to Prior Lake . Criego felt in the Ag Preserve program it is . The Green Acre program is fine . At some point a developer will pay an enormous price to develop that land . If it is in the Ag Preserve it will take 8 years to get out of the program. By that time the developer will be long gone and find another piece of property. If it ' s not in the Ag Preserve, the Vierlings can sell the property at that point and take advantage of the offer. • Questioned Criego why he (the City) would be making that decision for the Vierlings . Criego responded the Vierlings took the land out of the Ag Preserve in 1993 , it was not the City. • The City based their 1995 Comprehensive Plan on the Vierlings taking the land out of the Ag Preserve . It was done that way because of the Vierlings . • Criego felt 10 years was a good compromise. The Comprehensive Plan is a 20 year document. • The Vierlings should be able to decide . Does not have a problem with the Vierlings staying in Ag Preserve . • Criego responded that the Comprehensive Plan which was discussed with the citizens of Prior Lake, the Planning Commission and City Council and because of the actions of the Vierlings they decided to make the land something different from farming. Now because of financial considerations and a fear of the government, the Vierlings would like the Ag Program to be re4nstuted for a L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 8 Planning Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 period of time . I can accept that, but not forever. They can still farm forever, no one says they can' t, just not under the Ag Preserve program . Stamson : • The bottom line is there is no financial impact . The real concern is that the City is going to initiate something that will cease the existence of the farm, which may or may not happen . • Criego felt the Commission is a buffer between the citizens of Prior Lake and the government. The City may or may not cease the operation. The chances of stopping the operation are minute . Understand Vierlings ' fear. • This document has been worked on for a long time and under the scrutiny of the Met Council and now we ' re talking about changing . We should not base the amendment on one family ' s fear of what is not going to happen. This is not the way to run a government . It is not good for the balance of the citizens of Prior Lake . Kansier explained the Comprehensive Plan and all approvals from the Met Council . Atwood : • Does not want to be part of a Commission that anyone can stand up and put a Superamerica in my nextdoor lot . That ' s not what we ' re doing here. • There is tons of sentiment in this community and this property is a landmark, for those reasons we should extend a hand for some piece of mind, whether or not we agree with it. Their fears are real . Why tie their (the Vierlings) hands behind their back . m _- 13 E3 Stamson : • There is no concrete actionable thing the City is doing to stop the farming operation. The fear something might happen is a less valid reason to re-write the ordinance. • This is a primary piece of real estate . It is on the corner to two major road in a developing community . Is the best use of that land rural residential? It is not what Mr. Vierling wants to do with is property, that ' s up to him. From the City ' s point of view, is rural residential the best use for that property? It is not, long term. • If Mr. Vierling wants to stay in the farm, that ' s up to him. What the Comprehensive Plan does is set an instance if he decides to quit farming what is going to happen to it? • We are discussing a planning document and what the purpose is . Atwood : • Agreed . But felt there are certain circumstances that dictate certain allowances and this one of the instances . • Believes the average citizen in Prior Lake would agree. Lemke : L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO21201 .doc 9 Planning Connnission Meeting February 12, 2001 • Questioned Mr. Kelly on eminent domain protection. Kelly read the Met Council ' s interpretation . • Understand under eminent domain the land can be condemned in a one year time frame. • Kelly said that definition is going on the Ag Preserve Program . • Kelly responded the Vierlings are concerned that a government agency will come in and condemn part of the farm. The Ag Preserve will protect them from any government agency and let them continue farming . • The authority ' s right under eminent domain, the 8 years would not be an ironclad guaranty. If an authority came in to condemn this property even though it is in Ag Preserve, the EQB would look at it and say no other alternative exists , they can only delay it for one year if another alternative exist . Kelly said those procedures are on a high standard of taking the farming operation as a priority for the purpose of statute . There area number of hoops . Its not just saying we want this land for "x" purpose . It has to be balanced out. • Kansier noted that procedure applys when acquiring land or easement having an area of 10 acres or more . This procedure is over and above the eminent domain procedure in the Ag Preserve, MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF STATUS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH THE CONDITION WITHIN TWO YEARS THE PROCESS TO TAKE IT OUT OF AG PRESERVE IS UNDERTAKEN BY THE OWNER THEREBY ALLOWING IT TO BE OUT OF THE AG PRESERVE WITHIN TEN YEARS . Vote taken indicated ayes by Atwood and Criego , nays by Stamson and Lemke . The motion fails . The deadline for the City to take action is in March. It can go the City Council with no recommendation. MOTION BY LEMKE, SECOND BY STAMSON, TO DENY THE REQUEST . Vote taken indicated ayes by Stamson and Lemke, nays by Atwood and Criego . The Motion fails . MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD , TO TABLE THE REQUEST TO THE FEBRUARY 26, 2001 , MEETING. Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . A recess was called at 8 : 00 p . m. The meeting reconvened at 8 : 11 P .M . B . Case File #00-083 Rock Creek Homes are requesting variances to minimum lot area and structure setback to the ordinary high water mark for the construction of a single family home on the property located at 5690 Fairlawn Shores Trail SE, L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 10 r O� PR4to ti y v 01 �?' NN ESOC P PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM : 4A SUBJECT : CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE VIERLING PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 249 TOWNSHIP 115 , RANGE 22 (Case File #00-084) PRESENTER : JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR PUBLIC HEARING : _X_ YES NO-N/A DATE : FEBRUARY 12 , 2001 INTRODUCTION : Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling have filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAR 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land. The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 . At that meeting, the applicants ' representatives distributed a packet of information . The Planning Commission continued the public hearing in order to review this information . REVIEW OF KELLY & FAWCETT LETTER The letter submitted by the firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. , representatives of the applicants , contains several reasons they believe the Comprehensive Plan should be amended . The following is the staff' s analysis of these reasons . Historical Reasons : The letter suggests the Vierling farm should be preserved for its historical value . There are no structures of historical significance on this site . Farmland, in itself, does not have historical value . In fact, on page 4 of the letter, the applicants note the land will be developed at some time in the future . 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00084pc2 .doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952 ) 447 -4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Logistical Reasons : 1 . The City is not prepared for High Density or Office Parks The letter suggests the City is unprepared for development of the Vierling property. The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to identify future land uses . In conjunction with this, the plan also identifies potential road connections and allows the City to plan for the extension of utilities and other public services . Specific site development occurs at the time of the development of the property. The letter also states the proposed zoning of this property will also affect the real estate taxes . First of all, the property is currently zoned A (Agriculture) and the City has no plans to change that designation at this time. Although the Comprehensive Plan identifies this site for other uses, the Zoning Ordinance recognizes the existing use and investment in the property. Any change to the current Zoning designation of this property would most likely be initiated by the property owner. Second, the attached letter from Leroy Arnoldi, Director of Taxation for Scott County, notes taxes are based on the actual use of the property, not the Zoning classification. As long as the property continues to be used agriculturally, it will be taxed on that basis . This letter also suggests the financial implication of removal of this property from the Agricultural Preserve Program is $ 1 . 50 per acre, or about $480 per year. We have requested a more detailed analysis from Scott County, which should be available at the meeting. a. Water Service. The letter states water service is not available to serve this site. In fact, trunk water mains are located in CSAH 42 , directly in front of this property, and can be extended to serve this site . The City has also received a permit to construct a new well near The Wilds development, and will commence construction this year. b . Sewer Service. The letter also states sewer service is not available to serve this site . Trunk sewer mains are also located in CSAH 42 , directly in front of this property, and can be extended to serve this site . Furthermore, the letter states this property is not within the MUSA. As stated in the previous staff report, the City does not have a fixed MUSA. Rather, the City has utilized an undesignated MUSA. This approach allocates a certain number of acres for development. The City has the flexibility to determine which land may be used as part of that allocation. The Comprehensive Plan identified a Primary Area of MUSA Acreage Allocation, based on the availability of municipal services . This property was included within that allocation. c . Traffic Considerations . The letter states CSAH 42 is not capable of handling the traffic generated by the development of this site . CSAH 42 is a 44ane highway, classified as an arterial street . On the east side of the property is CSAH 18 , which was also recently approved, and which is classified as a minor arterial . The 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00084pc2.doc Page 2 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on CSAH 42 is approximately 13 , 000 trips, and the ADT on CSAR 18 is approximately 3 , 500 trips . The roads are designed to accommodate up to 27 , 000 ADT and 7 , 500 trips respectively. The land use designation of this property was based, in part, on the fact it is accessible from these two roads . As the property north of CSAH 42 develops , Pike Lake Trail will be upgraded, and an internal street system will be designed to accommodate the traffic on this site . 2 . Community buildings on this site. The letter contends the City is interested in the Vierling property for use as a high school site, a library/resource center and a fire station . The School District has identified a location for the new high school in Savage . The City of Prior Lake completed construction of the new library in the downtown area in 1999 . Finally, the City is planning a fire station on the north side of Prior Lake in the future . All sites considered for the station have been on the south side of CSAH 42 . 3 . No Population Growth . The letter states there is no need for additional housing in Prior Lake . The population of Prior Lake has increased approximately 40% since 1990 . In 2000, the City issued a record number of building permits for new dwelling units (276) . An inventory of vacant lots indicates the City has about 1 -2 years supply available for building. Finally, in a recent report on the availability of rental housing in Prior Lake, Scott County estimates a 1 % vacancy rate. Other studies by the Metropolitan Council have indicated there is a need for additional housing in the metropolitan area, including Scott County and Prior Lake. 4 . Orderly Development. The letter states the Vierlings need time to develop an orderly plan for the development of their property. The existing Comprehensive Plan provides them with that time, as well as with an idea of the future uses of the site. Environmental Reasons 1 . The City ' s Mission to Protect the Natural Environment. The City is committed to protecting the natural environment; however, this commitment does not preclude development. The City protects the environment through regulations such as wetland preservation, tree preservation, open space requirements and other ordinance requirements . The City is actually able to exercise more environmental control through the development process than on agricultural land. l :\00files\00compam\00-084\00084pc2 .doc Page 3 The plan also seeks to maintain a variety of residential densities . This is done on a citywide basis , not parcel by parcel . The designation of this site as High Density Residential seeks to balance the density overall . The Minneapolis Star Tribune article cited by the letter also notes that all of the development that has occurred in the State of Minnesota since 1982 has decreased land classified as rural by only 1 . 1 percent . The article quotes University of Minnesota geographer Fraser Hart, who states , "Most lost farmland was in marginal agricultural counties with soils of low inherent fertility and topography unsuited to modern farm machinery. " 2 . The City' s Mission to Preserve Open Space. The letter states the Comprehensive Plan states that "major open space should be planned and provided" and that "preservation and treatment of open space shall be a major consideration in planning and review of all types of development . " The letter is is in stating that current land use designations of this property would not allow the provision of open space. The City Comprehensive Plan has identified several locations for neighborhood and community parks . In addition, the City Zoning and Subdivision regulations include required open space provisions for development and parkland dedication requirements . In a letter to neighbors, dated January 8 , 2001 , Kelly & Fawcett also state that enrollment in the Agricultural Preserve Program is for a period of 8 years . This is not entirely correct. Minnesota Statutes § 473H . 08 states the duration of the Agricultural Preserve continues until either the landowner or the City initiates the expiration of the program. Once expiration is initiated, the property remains in the preserve program for 8 years . The City may only initiate expiration if the comprehensive plan is amended so the land is no longer designated for long-term agricultural use . In 1993 , the property owner initiated the removal of the east 240 acres of the site from the program . The land will be officially removed in 2001 . The Comprehensive Plan designation for this area was first amended in 1995 , and identified this property as R-HD , C-BO and PI (Planned Industrial) . This designation was based, in part, on the property owners ' decision to remove the property from the Agricultural Preserve Program . In 1999 , the plan was updated following a public hearing. At that time, this property was designated for R-HD and C-BO uses . ANALYSIS OF APPLICATION : This property is presently zoned A (Agricultural) . The east 160 acres of the site are designated as C-BO (Business Office Park) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map , and the west 160 acres of the site is designated as R-HD (High Density Residential) . The applicants have requested these designations be changed to Rural Density. 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00084pc2.doc Page 4 The Rural Density classification is intended for land where urban services are unavailable . Even this designation is intended to accommodate future urban development. The Agricultural Preserve program was established in 1980 to preserve long-term agricultural areas in the Metropolitan area, and to recognize farmland as a long-term use. Under the law, land is no longer eligible for the program when the Comprehensive Plan no longer identifies the land for long-term agricultural uses . In 2000 , the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program . The City refused this request on the basis the property no longer qualified for program participation because it failed to meet the statutory requirements . The current Comprehensive Plan designation of the property does not preclude the use of this land for agricultural purposes . The City has no objection to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax protection for existing farmland. The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners . The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term agriculture has been in place since 1995 . The applicants have not demonstrated any need to change this designation . ALTERNATIVES : 1 . Recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment as requested. 2 . Recommend denial of the request. 3 . Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission RECOMMENDATION : The Planning staff recommends Alternative #2 . ACTION REQUIRED : A motion and second to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Rural Density designation is required. EXHIBITS : 1 . Location Map 2 . Copy of Kelly & Fawcett Letters 3 . Copy of Letter from Leroy Amoldi 4 . Zoning Map 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00084pc2 .doc Page 5 to I JAN 1 6 2001 HAROLD D . BOHLEN 13380 Hickory Avenue Prior Lake , MN 55372 H (952 ) 445 -2828 January 11 , 2001 City of Prior Lake Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator Planning Department 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372 Dear Ms Jane Kansier, In regards to the proposed amendment to the City of Prior Lake year 2020 comprehensive plan , for 320 acres of property located in sections 23 & 24 , tow11 nship 115 , range 22 , from the R- HD designation and the C- B © designation to Rural Density . I have no objection to this amendment as This would allow the Vierlings to continue to farm of which their family has done for last 100 years or so . Sincerely , Harold D . Bohlen O� PRION v pi P 1 N N E S O� REVISED CITY OF PRIOR LAKE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE YEAR 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24 , TOWNSHIP 1159 RANGE 22 You are hereby notified that tie Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at Prior Lake Fire Station # 1 , located at 16776 Fish Point Road, SE, on ru6day, January. 16, 1001 at 6 : 30 p .m . , or as soon thereafter as possible . The purpose of the public hearing is to consider a proposal to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map for 320 acres of property located on the north side of CSAR 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 in the SE '/4 of Section 23 and the SW '/4 of Section 24 , Township 115 , Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density . Legal Description : The Southwest 1/4 of Section 2 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota; And The Southeast 1/4 of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should attend this public hearing . The Planning Commission will accept oral and or written comments . If you have questions regarding this matter, contact the Prior Lake Planning Department at 447 -9810 . Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator City of Prior Lake Mailed on Friday, January 5 , 2001 . 1 :\o0files\00compam\00=084\rev mail note.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 January 11 , 2001 Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. Attorneys at Law 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 Re : Vierling Farms To whom it may concern: We live directly across the street from the Vierling farm and definitely do not want to see them gone . Our first reason for wanting to see them re-enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program, is that it is their land, has been in their families for years and they should be the ones to determine what they do with their land . It is a little scary to think that someone can take someone else ' s property from them for any reason. The second reason is we enjoy having a farm across the street from us . It gives us the illusion of living in the country . We will not be able to attend the hearing . VA Kerry Smith 5299 140' St NE Prior Lake, Mn 55372 CC. , l'=j a� P � , or L"Uu kk January 11 , 2001 Kelly & Fawcett, P . A . Attorneys at Law 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 Re : Vierling Farms To whom it may concern : We live directly across the street from the Vierling farm and definitely do not want to see them gone . Our first reason for wanting to see them re- enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program, is that it is their land, has been in their families for years and they should be the ones to determine what they do with their land. It is a little scary to think that someone can take someone else ' s property from them for any reason . The second reason is we enjoy having a farm across the street from us . It gives us the illusion of living in the country . ZWwill not be mile to attend the hearing . icael & Linda Smith 5313 140th St NE Prior Lake , Mn 55372 cc : City of Prior Lake FROM FAX NO . Jan . 16 2001 10 : 17RM P1 Lot T Partnership c/o Sue Anne Griffith 943 Cemctery Lane Aspen , CO 8161 .14079 (970)544-4633 (970)544-804$ FAX January 16, 2001 Prior Lake Planning Commission 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S .E . Prior rake, MN 55372- 1714 re : Amend Land Use Map to Rural Density Vierling Property Dear Planning Commission . The purpose of this letter is to support the Vierling Family' s request to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for their property to Rural Density. This will enable them to re-enroll V n the Agricultural •Preserve Program . I represent Lot I Partnership, a family partnership with ownership in Meadowlawn ( Section 25 Township 115 Range 022 W 1 /2 NW V4 ), the property directly south of the Vierling' s acreage in the middle . We are surrounded by urban development, both east and west . With so few remaining large tracts of land within the city limits, the need for open space in the form of agricultural lands is a necessity , I urge you to grant this requested amendment , Respectfully submitted, Sue Anne Griffith, Manager Lot I Partnership v Kellv & Fawcett , P . A . ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 PATRICK L KELLY Of Counsel: SONG LO FAWCETT JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR. STEPHEN KELLY MCGUIGAN & HOLLY, P. L. C. SIA LO CHAD D. LEMMONS (651 ) 224-3781 KATHLEEN M . LOUCKS ROBERT J. FOWLER Facsimile (651 ) 223-8019 E-Mail : kelfawcett@gwest. net January 8 , 2001 Dear Neighbors : Please be advised that Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. represents the Vierlings who live at 13985 Pike Lake Trail , N . E . and 14310 Pike Lake Trail, N. E . , Prior Lake, Minnesota . As you are aware, the Vierling family has requested the City of Prior Lake Planning Commission to amend its Comprehensive Use Plan to re- enroll their property north of County Road 42 into the Agricultural Preserve Program . Enrollment of the property in the Agricultural Preserve Program would allow it to remain farm land for a period of eight years . After the eight year period, the Vierlings would be required to re-enroll in the program. A public hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled for January 16, 2001 at 6 : 30 p . m. at the Fire Station #1 , located at 16776 Fish Point Road, Prior Lake, Minnesota . On behalf of the Vierling family, I would like to request your support in this matter. Enrollment in the Agricultural Preserve Program is very important to the Vierling family because the property has been in their family for decades and they seek to preserve it as farmland . The Vierlings currently farm the property and wish to continue farming . The Vierling property is one of the few remaining large tracts of land within the Prior Lake city limits . The Vierlings need your support in obtaining this designation for the property . It you have any questions , please Uo not hesi ate. io contact Mc ULA the above niunber. Th;Tlyou fer your attention and anticipated support. Respectfully yours , KELLY & FAWCE--TT , P .A. sy, 6 �WtlU Song Lo Fawcett cc : Mike and Becky Vierling Helen Vierling Edward Vierling Kelly & Fawcett , P . A . ATTORNEYS AT LAW JAN 1 6 2001 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA j 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 PATRICK J. KELLY Of Counsel: SONG LO FAWCETT JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR, STEPHEN KELLY MCGUIGAN & HOLLY, P.L.C. SIA LO CHAD D. LEMMONS (651 ) 224-3781 KATHLEEN M. LOUCKS Facsimile (651 ) 223-8019 ROBERT J. FOWLER E-Mail : kelfawcett@qwest.net January 15 , 2001 Members of the Planning Commission City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Southeast Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 Dear Members of the Planning Commission: The Firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P . A . represents the Vierling Family. As you are aware, the Vierling family has requested you to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan ( " Comp . Plan") from the current designations of R-HD (High Density Residential) and C-BO (Business Office Park) to Rural Residential Density of their parcels . This request by the Vierlings should be granted for a number of historical, environmental and logistical reasons set forth in this letter. Hopefully, the information that we provide you in this letter and the corresponding exhibits will allow you to approve the Comp . Plan amendment as requested by the Vierlings . A. Historical Reasons The Comp . Plan should be amended because of the large amount of history that encompasses the Vierling family farm. The Vierling family farm is over 150 years old and has been a part of Prior Lake since the settlement of the city. The Vierlings have cared for and farmed this land for that 150 years , Since these parcels has been in the fancily for several generations , it has a great sentimental value to the Vierling family which is why they want to preserve it, so that future generations of Vierlings may take part in their family tradition. The City of Prior Lake must pay special respect to the significance the property holds for the Vierling family as its legacy in Minnesota, Scott County and Prior Lake . The City also has an interest in preserving the Vierling parcels for its own historical reasons . The Vierling farm is one of the oldest "businesses " in the City because it existed before the City ' s incorporation. The City has also expressed that it is interested in preserving history . It its Comp . Plan, the City states that it wishes to "incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum feasible extent. " (Comp . Plan at 25 , 26 and 42) . The City specifically notes in the Comp . Plan that areas of the Vierling parcels (Prior Lake) are considered to be "the natural resource area of Letter• to Planning Commission Page 2 from PatrickJ. Kelly and danuau 15, 2001 Chad D. Lemmons greatest historical significance . " (Comp . Plan at 117) (emphasis added) . Based on its values expressed above in its Comp . Plan and the fact that the Vierling property represents a part of Prior Lake ' s heritage , it should be preserved by the City . Be Logistical 1 . City is not currently prepared for High Density or Office Parks The proposed zoning of the Vierling parcels represent intensive uses of the property and would best be implemented by an overall plan for orderly development . The real estate taxes which would result from the proposed zoning could force piecemeal development of the Vierling parcels . This is not in the best interests of either the City or the Vierlings . In order to solve this problem , the City should designate the parcels Rural/Residential density . Land is often designated Rural/Residential Density in order to preserve large tracts of land which can eventually accommodate orderly planned urban development . (Comp . Plan at 44) . In addition, the City can create the option of parenthetically indicating other classifications for Rural/Residential Density land. (Comp . Plan at 44) . The alternative categories reflect the City ' s determination that the property would be eventually conducive to some urban , rather than rural use . (Comp . Plan at 44) . In any event , the City will be amending the Comp . Plan after ten years , which will then allow re -evaluation of the property . Since the City does not currently have water service , sewer service , proper transportation service to the Vierling parcels , this option would be the best option for the City. a . Water Service The City has not prepared the Vierling parcels for development because water mains do not even exist to serve them at this time (Watermain Map) . In fact, the water mains are not a part of the City ' s immediate plan. They are a part of the 20 Year Capital Improvement Plan instead. Without immediate improvements , present well capacity can not support the immediate development of the Vierling parcels because the Department of Natural Resources will not allow any additional withdrawals from the Jordan. Sandstone aquifer and also has concerns about the City utilizing the Mount Simon/Hinckely aquifer. Therefore , the City would have difficulties obtaining water service for the Vierling parcels in the near future which would be required to make it developable . b . Sewer Service At present, the City has no sewer service infrastructure in place to serve the Vierling parcels because they are outside the present MUSA line . (Existing Sanitary Sewer Map) . The current MUSA line is entirely within the City limits but it does not include all of the land within the City limits , including a majority of the Vierling parcels . ( Comp . Plan at 254) . The Comp . Plan states that development of land within the MUSA will require the extension of municipal sanitary sewer services . (Comp . Plan at 254) . Land outside the MUSA cannot be connected to Letter to Planning Commission Page 3 from Patrick J. Kelly and January 15, 2001 Chad D. Lemmons the municipal sewer system and must be developed with larger individual lots to accommodate onsite wastewater treatment . (Comp . Plan at 254) . Therefore , because there is no sewer service to the Vierling parcels , the City is not capable of developing the Vierling parcels at this time . C * Traffic Considerations Even if water service and sewer service are not taken under consideration, the Vierling parcels still faces significant problems with traffic if they are deemed High Density Residential and Business or Office Park. County Road 42 , the main thoroughfare through the Vierling parcels , is not capable of safely handling the additional traffic that development of the Vierling would generate . Currently County Road 42 is only four-lane from Ferndale Avenue to Highway 13 . (Comp . Plan at 134) . In addition, the City admits in its Comp . Plan that there is a "limited availability of transit service , " which means that personal automobiles are the only means of getting around in the City . (Comp . Plan at 154) . Since the roads surround the Vierling parcels are not able to handle the amount of traffic that High Density Residential and Business Office Park would bring, the City should not develop the land until these changes are made . 2 . The City wishes to build community buildings on the Vierling Parcels If the Vierling parcels are rezoned and developed, the City will lose its chance to build on the property . The City is currently looking to build a new high school , a Library/Resource Center and a Fire Station (Comp . Plan at 37 and 200) . If the parcels are rezoned, the City will not have the time that it needs to plan the construction of these buildings because they will be immediately sold to commercial developers because the real estate taxes from the proposed zoning would force piecemeal development of the property. However, if the City designates the property rural/residential , it would have the opportunity to have some additional time in considering purchasing the parcels for its own use . 3 . No New Housing is Needed at this Time, Population Has Not Grown The City has no need for Residential High Density property at this time . In its Comp . Plan, the City states that its population increase has stabilized since 1990 and its desire for a rate of development may even be lower than private interests would prefer ( Comp . Plan at 271 and 124) . In general , the City states that its housing supply is adequate , it already has a reasonable supply of single family, duplex, and townhouse rentals , a significant amount of affordable and moderate cost housing remains available (Comp . Plan at 101 and 102) . However, the typical uses of urban high density consist of two-family dwellings , townhouses , apartments , and other designs , including single family manufactured dwellings and single family dwellings by conditional use permit and/or Plamied Unit Development . (Comp . Plan at 49) . Based on the language in its Comp . Plan, these types of dwellings are not needed presently by the City. Therefore, the Vierling parcels should be designated residential/rural until this need is more evident. . Letter to Planning Commission Page 4 from Patrick J. Kelly and January 15, 2001 Chad D. Lemmons 4 . Orderly Development The Vierlings understand that as Prior Lake continues to develop , farming will become economically unviable . To prepare for this , the Vierlings need time to develop an orderly plan for the development of their property. By granting the amendment (and subsequent Ag Preserve status) , the Vierlings and the City have time to agree on orderly development of the Vierling Property. Denial of this amendment (and Ag Preserve status) increases the pressure on the Vierlings to develop in a haphazard manner resulting in an ill-conceived development. Be Environmental 1 . The City ' s Mission to Protect the Natural Environment The City, in its Mission Statement and in its Comp . Plan, states that it is committed to " environmentally sensitive community development . " (Comp . Plan at 25 and AA ) . The Mission Statement of the City reads " [t] he City of Prior Lake is committed to serving the common good of its residents by promoting community values , environmentally sensitive community development, robust business growth, financial stability, safety, and diverse recreational opportunities . " (Comp . Plan at A4 ) (emphasis added) . This Mission Statement is included in the Comp . Plan under Objective Number 5 which provides for " conservation and protection of the natural environment. " (Comp . Plan at 32) (emphasis added) . With very little development, forests, small wetlands and plenty of pastureland, the Vierling parcels represent an ideal preservation of the natural environment of the City . By amending its Comp . Plan to zone the Vierling parcels as Rural Residential , the City would be able to fulfill its objectives of preserving the natural environment because the maximum rural density is one dwelling unit per 40 acres . (Comp . Plan at 44) . This designation would allow the City to preserve the forests , wetlands and pastureland that give Prior Lake its greatest appeal to its residents and visitors . In addition, by designating the Vierling parcels as Rural Residential, the City would be fulfilling another one of its objectives stated in its Comp . Plan . The City states in its Comp . Plan that one of its objectives that it wants to "maintain a variety of residential densities . " (Comp . Plan at 25 and 113 ) . By zoning the Vierlings ' property as office park and residential high density, very little rural density property will be left in the City, in fact only one area on the outskirts of the City would remain rural density. The City zoned large amounts of area in the City limits as Urban Low/Medium Density and Urban High Density (Comp . Land Use Map) . It is also important to note that other cities and counties have had great success in preserving a mixture of densities . Dakota County ' s mixture of towns , cities and farms have had a great appeal , resulting in tremendous population gains . (Metropolitan Council, A FARMER FIGHTS To SAVE AGRICULTURAL LAND , see www.metrocouncil . org/mnsmartgrowtll/citizens_ stelzel .htm; and Peterson, David, " Loss of rural land accelerating in state , study finds, " Minneapolis Star Tribune , January 11 , 2001 ) . Therefore , if it maintains the zoning recommended by the Comp . Plan, the City will not be meeting one of its key objectives , maintaining a variety of residential densities . Letter to Planning Commission Page 5 from Patrick J. Kelly and January 15, 2001 Chad D. Lemmons 2 . The City ' s Mission to Preserve Open Spaces . By designating the Vierling property as rural residential , the City would create open spaces which are called for by its Comp . Plan. In its Comp . Plan, the City states that "major open spaces should be planned an provided" and that "preservation and treatment of open space shall be a major consideration in planning and review of all types of development within the City . " (Comp . Plan at 38 and 106) (emphasis added) . A large portion of the Vierling parcels has been designated by the city as either High Density Residential or Business Office Park. (Comp . Land Use Map) . The City defines High Density Residential as " densities up to 30 units per acres . " (Comp . Plan at 48 ) . It defines Business Office Park as "business and office park; corporate headquarters ; and professional and administrative offices ; and limited research, development and manufacturing facilities . " (Comp . Plan at 58 ) . These types of land use of the Vierling parcels would not allow for open spaces to be provided. The Rural/Residential designation calls for one dwelling unit per 40 acres , which would provide for this desired open space . By designating the property Rural/Residential , the City would be achieving its objectives set forth in its Comp . Plan by preserving open spaces because rural/residential calls for one dwelling unit per 40 acres . With very little property designated by the City as rural/residential , giving the Vierling property this designation is the only way for the City to maintain its objective of preserving open spaces . Based on the above and the attached Exhibits , the Vierlings ' request to amend the Comp . Plan should be granted because of historical , environmental and logistical reasons . Thank you for your time and consideration . Respectfully yours , KELLY & FAWCETT, P .A. Patrick J . Kelly Chad D . Lemmons Appendix Comp . Plan Selected 2020 Comp . Plan sections pp . 25 -26 , 32 , 37 - 38 , 42 , 44, 4849 , 58 , 101402 , 106 , 113 , 117 , 124 , 134 , 1545 2005 254- 255 , 271 , A41 A-2 Maps Comp . Land Use Plan Map , December 28 , 1999 City of Prior Lake Land Use Plan Map , Fig 4- 1 , p . 129 Primary Area of MUSA Acreage Allocation Map , dated December 29 , 1999 Comprehensive Water Plan Map , Ex. 8 -3 Watermain Map , Fig . 8 - 1 Sewer Comprehensive Plan Map , Fig. 74 Existing Sanitary Sewer System Map Articles Metropolitan Council , A FARMER FIGHTS TO SAVE AGRICULTURAL LAND , see www. metrocouncil . org/mnsmailgrowth/citizens_stelzel .htm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Peterson, David, " Loss of rural land accelerating in state , study finds, " Minneapolis Star Tribune , January 11 , 2001 Neighbors Email from Kathleen and David Sandvik, dated January 12 , 2001 Letter from Michael & Linda Smith, dated January 11 , 2001 Letter from Kerry Smith, dated January 11 , 2001 Letter from Karen J. (Koskelin) Lucy, dated January 11 , 2001 Suesan Pace Vierling Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 1 From : Jane Kansier <JKansier@CityofPRIORLAKE . com > To : Jim Ericson <JEricson@CityofPRIORLAKE . com > , Jim Petersen <jetersen@CityofPRIORLAKE . com > , Joe Zieska <JZieska@CityofPRIORLAKE . com > , Mike Gundlach <Mgundlach@CityofPRIORLAKE . com > , Wes Mader <wmader@CityofPRIORLAKE . com > Date : Tue , Jan 23 , 2001 2 : 46 PM Subject : Vierling Comprehensive Plan Amendment Attached are the letters submitted by Kelly & Fawcett, P . A . , representatives for the Vierling family. " Kellyi " is the letter sent to neighboring property owners . " Kelly2 " is the letter submitted to the Planning Commission the day of the meeting . This item is scheduled for additional review by the Planning Commission on January 29 , 2001 . Please let me know if you have any questions . <<kelly1 . doc>> << kelly2 . doc>> CC : Don Rye < DRye@CityofPRIORLAKE . com > , Frank Boyles < FBoyles@CityofPRIORLAKE . com > , " Suesan Lea Pace ( E- mail) " <space@hlnsj . com > � 1 • ' n �(f u.. t 1 Lim, rw' cln 6 wnaok k UJ 41) uon f Lie Our-cQ- MOOO . . i►�--�-t-- Felly & T' awcett PA . A T Tr O R N E Y S A T I , A W 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 PATRICK J . KELLY Of Counsel : SONG 1,0 FAWCF.Tr JOIN F. LJANNIGAN, JR. Sl'FPH1iN K]_iLl..l' MCGU1GAN Y HOLLY. P, L.C. SIA LO CHAD D. UiNV 4ONS (651 ) 224.3781 KATHLI_I N M . LOUCKS ROBERT J. FOWLER Facsimile (651 ) 223-8019 C-Mail : kclfawcet1@Agwcst. nct January 8 , 2001 Dear Neighbors . Please be advised that Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. represents the Vierlings who live at 13985 Pike Lake Trail , N . E . and 14310 Pike Lake Trail , N. F. , Prior Lake, Minnesota. As you are aware, the Vierling family has requested the City of Prior Lake Planning Comn-iission to amend its Comprehensive Use Plan to rc- cnroli their property north of County Road 42 into the Agricultural Preserve Program . Enrollment of the property in the Agricultural Preserve Program would allow it to remain farm land for a period of eight: years . After the eight year period, the Vierlings would be required to re- enroll in the program'. A public hearing before the Planning Convni.ssion is scheduled for January 16, 2041 at 6 : 30 p . m* at the Fire Station # 1 , located at 16776 Fish Point Road, Prior Lake, Minnesota . On behalf of the Vierling family, I would like to request your support in this matter. Enrollment in the Agricultural Preserve Program is very important to the Vierling family because the property has been in their family for decades and they seek to preserve it as farmland . The Vierlings currently farm the property and wish to continue farming. The Vierling property is one of the few remaining large tracts of land within the Prior Lake city limits . The Vierlings need your support in obtaining this designation for the property . If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at the above number. Thank you for your attention and anticipated support. Respectfully yours, ICI;LLY & T+AWCETT, P. A. 3VA 6 f W4 al Song Lo Fawcett cc : Mike and Becky Vierling Helen Vierling Edward Vierling Jane Kansier From : Suesan Pace [space@halleland . com] Sent : Tuesday , January 23 , 2001 3 :40 PM To : JEricson@CityofPRIORLAKE . com ; JKansier@CityofPRIORLAKE . com ; jpetersen@CityofPRIORLAKE . com ; JZieska@CityofPRIORLAKE . com ; Mgundlach@CityofPRIORLAKE . com ; wmader@CityofPRIORLAKE . com Cc : DRye@CityofPRIORLAKE . com ; FBoyles@CityofPRIORLAKE . com Subject : Re : Vierling Comprehensive Plan Amendment Thanks Jane , I ' ll review them and provide you with comments . Based on what I heard , it appears the Vierling attorneys are attempting to build a record . If that ' s the case you need to ask yourself , why . In any case the City should be concerned about building its own record . We can chat about that . This message and any attachments may contain information that is privileged , confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law . If you are not the intended recipient or authorized to receive for the recipient , you are notified that dissemination , distribution or copying of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited . If you have received this message in error , please immediately advise the sender by reply e -mail and delete the message and any attachments . Thank you . > > > Jane Kansier < JKansier@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> 01 / 23 / 01 02 : 33PM > > > Attached are the letters submitted by Kelly & Fawcett , P . A . , representatives for the Vierling family . " Kellyl " is the letter sent to neighboring property owners . " Kelly2 " is the letter submitted to the Planning Commission the day of the meeting . This item is scheduled for additional review by the Planning Commission on January 29 , 2001 . Please let me know if you have any questions . < < kellyl . doc > > < < kelly2 . doc > > 1 Kelly & Fawcett, P . A � ' ; I �s'�' A T T O R N E Y S A T L A V4' 2 ,IAN 16 2001 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA _ _ . i4 � 444 CEDAR STREET I -- SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 ' PATRICK J. KELLY Orcoansel: SONIC LO FAWCETT JOI IN F, nANNIGAN, JR. STEP11EN KELLY MCOUIGAN & HOLLY. P.L.C. SIA LO CHAD D. LEMMONS (651 ) 224.3781 KATI ILEEN M. LOUCKS Facsimile (651 ) 223-8019 ROEERTJ. FOWLER E-Mail : kclfawcett@dwesLnet January 15 , 2001 Members of the Planning Commission City of Prior Lake 15200 Eagle Creek Avenue Southeast Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 Dear Members of the Planning Commission. The Firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P.A . represents the Vierling Family. As you are aware, the Vierling family has requested you to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan ("Comp. Plan") from the current designations of R-HD (High Density Residential) and C-130 (Business Office Part;) to Rural Residential Density of their parcels . This request by the Vierlings should be granted for a number of historical , environmental and logistical reasons set forth in this .letter. Hopefully, the information that we provide you in this letter and the corresponding exhibits will allow you to approve the Comp. Plan amendment as requested by the Vierlings. A. Historical Reasons The Comp . Plan should be amended because of the large amount of history that encompasses the Vierling family farm. The Vierling fanuly farm is over 150 years old and has been a part of Prior Lake since the settlement of the city. The Vierlings have cared for and farmed this land for that 150 years . Since these parcels has been in the family for several generations , it has a great sentimental value to the Vierling family which is why they want to preserve it, so that future generations of Vierlings may take part in . their fanuly hadition . The City of Prior Lake must pay special respect to the significance the property holds for the Vierling family as its legacy in Minnesota, Scott County and Prior Lake . The City also has an interest in preseliiing the Vierling parcels for its own historical reasons. The Vierling farm is one of the oldest " businesses" in the City because it existed before the City ' s incorporation. The City has also expressed that it is interested in preserving history. It its Comp. Plan , the City states that it wishes to " incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum feasible extent. " ( Comp . Plan at 25 , 25 and 42). The City specifically notes in the Comp . Plan co that areas of the Vierling parcels (Prior Lake) are considered to be "the natural resource area of �Q �'` Letter to Planning Coinini,ssion Page 2 fi-oin Patrick J. Kelly and January IS, 2001 Chad D. Lenitnons greatest historical significance. " (Comp . Plan at 117) (emphasis added) . Based on its values expressed above in its Comp . Plan and the fact that the Vierling property represents a part of Prior Lake ' s heritage, it should be preserved by the City. B . Logistical 1 . City is not currently prepared for Nigh Density or Office Parks The proposed zoning of the Vierling parcels represent intensive uses of the property and would best be implemented by an overall plan for orderly development. The real estate taxes which would result from the proposed zoning- could force piecemeal development of the Vierling parcels . This is not in the best interests of either the City or the Vierlings . In order to solve this problem , the City should designate the parcels Rural/Residential density. Land is often designated Rural/Residential Density in order to preserve large tracts of land which can eventually accommodate orderly planned urban development. (Comp . Plan at 44) . In addition, the City can create the option of parenthetically indicating other classifications for Rural/Residenti.al Density land. (Corp . Plan at 44) . The alternative categories reflect the City ' s determination that the property would be eventually conducive to some urban, rather than rural use . (Comp . Plan at 44) . In any event , the City will be amending the Comp . Plan, after ten years , which will then allow re-evaluation of the property . Since the City does not currently have water service , sewer service , proper transportation service to the Vierling parcels , this option would be the best option for the City . a . Water Service The City has not prepared the Vierling parcels for development: because water mains do not even exist to serve them at this time (Watermain Map) . In fact, the water mains are not a part of the City ' s immediate plan. They are a part of the 20 Year Capital Improvement Plan instead. Without immediate improvements , present well capacity can not support the immediate development of the Vierling parcels because the Department of Natural Resources will not allow any additional withdrawals from the Torda.n -Sandstone aquifer and also has concerns about the City utilizing the Mount Simon/Hinckely aquifer. Therefore, the City would have difficulties obtaining water service for the Vierling parcels in the near future which would be required to make it developable . b . Sewer Service At present, the City has no sewer service infrastructure in place to serve the Vierling parcels because they are outside the present MUSA line. (Existing; Sanitary Sewer Map) . The current MUSA line is entirely within the City limits but it docs not include all of the land within the City limits , including a majority of the Vierling parcels . (Comp . Plan at 254) . The Camp . Plan states that development of land within the MUSA will require the extension of municipal sanitary sewer services . (Comp . Plan at 254) . Land outside the MUSA cannot be connected to Letter to Planning CoinlnrSSion Page 3 from PatriekJ. Kelly and January 15, 2001 Chad D. Lernmonr the municipal sewer system and must be developed with larger individual lots to accommodate onsite wastewater treatment. (Comp . Plan at 254) . Therefore, because there is no sewer service to the Vierling parcels, the City is not capable of developing the Vierling parcels at this time. c. Traffic Considerations Even if water service and sewer service are not taken under consideration, the Vierling parcels still faces significant problems with traffic if they are deemed High Density Residential and Business or Office Park. County Road 42, the main thoroughfare through the Vierling parcels, is not capable of safely handling the additional traffic that development of the Vierling would o generate. Currently County Road 42 is only four-lane from Ferndale Avenue to Highway 13 . ` (Comp . Plan at 134) . In addition, the City admits in its Comp . Plan that there is a " limited availability of transit service, " which means that personal automobiles are the only means of getting around in the City. (Comp . Plan at 154) . Since the roads surround the Vierling parcels are not able to handle the amount of traffic that High Density Residential and Business Office Park would bring, the City should not develop the land until these changes are made. 2. The City wishes to build community buildings on the Vierling Parcels If the Vierling parcels are rezoned and developed, the City will . lose its chance to build on the property . The City is currently looking to build a new high school, a Library/Resource Center and a Fire Stati_ (Comp . Plan at 37 and 200). If the parcels are rezoned , the City will not have the time that it needs to plan the construction of these buildings because they will be immediately sold to commercial developers because the real estate taxes from ffe proposed zonin would force piecemeal developTnent of the property . However, if the City designates the property rural/residential, it would have the opportunity to have some additional time in considering purchasing the parcels for its own use. 3 . No New Housing is Needed at this Time, Population Has Not Grown The City has no need for Residential High Density property at this time. In its Comp . Plan, the City states that its population increase las stabilized since 1990 and its desire for a. rate of development may even be lower than private interests would prefer (Comp . Plan at 271 and 124). In general, the City states that its housing supply is adequate, it already has a reasonable supply of single family, duplex, and townhouse rentza.ls , a significant amount of affordable and moderate cost housing remains available (Comp . Plan at 101 and 1 ) . However, the typical uses of urban high density consist of two-family dwellings , townhouses, apartments, and other designs , including single family manufactured dwellings and single family dwellings by conditional use permit and/or Planned Unit Development. (Comp . Plan at 49) . Based on the language in its Comp . Plan, these types of dvcjrcllings are not needed. presently by the City . Therefore, the Vierling parcels should be designated residential/rural until this need is more evident. Letter to Planning Commission Page 4 from Patrick_ J. Kell3) and .Tanuaty 15, 2001 Chad D. Lemmons 4. Orderly Development The Vierlings understand that as Prior Lake continues to develop, farming will become economically unviable. To prepare for this, the Vierlings need time to develop an orderly pian for the development of their property. By granting the amendment (and subsequent Ag Preserve` status), the VierIings and the City have ime o agree on orderly development of the Vierling Property. Denial o ris amendment (and Ag Preserve status) increases the pressure on the Vierling to develop in a haphazard manner resulting in an ill-conceived development. ID B. Environmental 1 . The City ' s Mission to Protect the Natural Environment The City, in its Mission Statement and in its Comp . Plan, states that it is committed to "environmentally sensitive community development. " (Comp . Plan at 25 and AA ). The Mission tatement of the City reads " fflhe City of Prior Lake is committed to serving the conmlon good Cof its residents by promoting community values, environmentally sensitive community development, robust business growth, financial stability, safety, and diverse recreational opportunities. " (Comp. Plan at A4 ) (emphasis added) . This Mission Statement is included in the Comp. Plan under Objective Number 5 which provides for " conservation and protection of the natural environment." (Comp . Plan at 32) (emphasis added). With very little development, forests, small wetlands and plenty of pastureland, the Vierling parcels represent an ideal k preservation of the natural environment of the City. By amending its Comp. Plan to zone the Vierling parcels as Rural Residential , the City would be able to fulfill its objectives of preserving n the natural environment because the maximum rural density is one dwelling unit per 40 acres . (Comp. Plan at 44) . This designation would allow the City to preserve the forests, wetlands and L aasture an that give Prior Lake its greatest appeal to its residents and visitors . or4 iA zm wwxoeve resu- c�,r►d2af��.s d o nab ,d:wP-e -la �vtd Q In addition, by designating the Vierling parcels as Rural Residential , the City would be fulfilling another one of its objectives stated in its Comp . Plan , The City states in its Comp . Plan that one of its objectives that it wants to "maintain a variety of residential densities . " (Comp . Plan at 25 get, and 113 ) . By zoning the Vierlings ' property as office park and residential high density, very � little rural density property will be left in the City, in fact only one area on the outskirts of the City would remain rural density. The City zoned large amounts of area in the City limits as Urban Low/Medium Density and Urban High Density (Comp. Land Use Map) . It is also important to note that other cities and counties have had great success in preserving a mixture of densities. Dakota County 's mixture of towns , cities and farms have had a great appeal , resulting in tremendous population gains. (Metropolitan Council, A FARMER FIGKINS TO SAVE AGRICULTURAL LAND, see www. metrocotmcil .org/mnsmartgrowtb/citizens_ stelzel_htili; and Peterson, David, " Loss of rural land accelerating in state, study finds, " Alinneapolis Star Tribune, January 11 , 2001 ) . Therefore, if it maintains the zoning recommended by the Comp. Plan, the City will not be meeting one of its key objectives, maintaining a variety of residential densities. Letter to Planning Commission Pale 5 from Patrick J. Kelly and Jccrnraty 15, 2001 Chad D. Lenmzons 2 . The City ' s Mission to Preserve Open Spaces. By designating the Vierling property as rural residential , the City would create open spaces which are called for by its Comp . Plan. In its Comp . Plan, the City states that "major open spaces should be planned an provided" and that "preservation and treatment of open space shall be a major consideration in plarming and review of all types of development within the City, " (Comp . Plan at 38 and 106) (emphasis added) . A large portion of the Vierling parcels has been designated by the city as either High Density Residential or Business Office Park . (Comp . Land Use Map) . The City defines High Density Residential as "densities -up to 30 units per acres . " (Comp . Plan at 48) . It defines Business Office Park as " business and office park; corporate headquarters; and professional and administrative offices ; and limited research, development and manufacturing facilities . " (Comp . Plan at 58 ) . These types of land use of the Vierlin arca s {-Pi would not allow for open -spaces to be provided : The-Rural/Residential designation calls for one 44JAA- dwelling unit per 40 acres, which would provide for this desired open space. By designating the property Rural/Residential , the City would be achieving its objectives set forth in its Camp . Plan by preserving open spaces because rural/residential calls for one dwelling unit per 40 acres . With very little property designated by the City as rural/residential , giving the Vierling property this designation is the only way for the City to maintain its objective of preserving open spaces . Based on the above and the attached Exhibits, the Vierlings ' request to amend. the Comp . Plan should be granted because of historical , environmental and logistical reasons . Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully yours , KELLY & FAWCETT, P .A . Patrick J. Kelly Chad D . Lemmons SCOTT COUNTY FINANCE DIVISION TAXATION DEPARTMENT " 200 FOURTH AVENUE WEST SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 (612) 496- 8115 LEROY T. ARNOLDI Fax : (612) 496- 8135 DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION DIRECTOR larnoldi@co . scott .mn . us http ://www . co . scott.mn .us January 18 , 2001 Ralph Teschner City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE : Taxable classifications Dear Ralph . As a follow up to our conversation relative to property tax classification, agricultural property is assessed as such, regardless of zoning , if it is used as a farming operation. Agricultural property enjoys the lowest rate of taxation. Agricultural property can also be classified as " Green Acres" thus enabling the deferment of special assessments . In addition, upon timely application the property can be • placed into "Agricultural Preserve", resulting in the potential of three references to agricultural property . What does this mean in tax language?? Agricultural classification : The lowest taxable classification of property Green Acres : A subset of agricultural classification. Generally resulting in a ten percent reduction in market value from the regular Agricultural classification. Agricultural Preserve : Agricultural property would be eligible for an additional credit of $ 1 . 50 per acre . I trust this will shed some light on a portion of the classification used for property taxes . If you have any questions feel free to call . Sincerely, Leroy T . Arnoldi Director of Taxation, Scott County f, p� PRtp� NES �� CITY OF PRIOR LAKE MINNESOTA 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTED BY THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL, APRIL, 1999 APPROVED BY THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL, NOVEMBER, 1999 j �, GOALS , OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES A. GOAL : SUITABLE HOUSING AND ENVIRONMENT Encourage the development of suitable housing in a desirable environment. OBJECTIVE No. l : Provide opportunities for a variety of affordable high quality housing. POLICIES . a. Codes and ordinances relating to development, redevelopment, and maintenance of housing shall be adopted and periodically reviewed to ensure specific direction is provided regarding affordable uses in each district and regarding minimum development standards . b . Review annually the current and planned programs of the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority. c. Maintain development standards and housing policies that allow for low and moderate cost housing opportunities . d. Develop and consider for adoption a code enforcement program for existing housing. e. Develop and maintain regulations that permit a mix of housing types, sizes and price ranges to be provided throughout the City. OBJECTIVE No. 2 : Maintain a choice of and encourage development of quality residential environments . POLICIES . a. Maintain a variety of residential densities (dwelling units per acre) . b . Ensure that public services and on-site improvements are completed at _the time. o£residentialdevelopment..----- ---- c . The burden of a satisfactory transition from one density or dwelling type to another is the rests with the developer seeking development plan approval . d. Discourage new residential subdivisions in isolated areas that have little or no potential to either develop into a viable neighborhood or to assimilate with an established neighborhood. e. Consideration of development plans for multiple dwellings in areas so designated on the Land Use Guide Plan should include the following design-related items : ( 1 ) New developments should not isolate existing single family dwellings by inhibiting pedestrian and/or vehicular access . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 25 Chapter 2 (2) New development completely surrounded by single family dwellings, should be discouraged in favor of large scale planned unit developments which are more conducive to a mix of housing styles with shared amenities. (3) There should be convenient access to collector and arterial streets and to available transit so to not unduly contribute to congestion on local residential streets . (4) Large common open areas may provide an effective transitional use to other uses . (5) Location near permanent public and private open spaces may compensate for the impact of the higher density. f. Create and enhance neighborhoods that provide parks and open spaces, public access to natural amenities located on and adjacent to the site, and pedestrian linkages throughout and among adjacent neighborhoods . g. Incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum feasible extent. h. Provide pedestrian access to commercial and industrial centers, public lands, and schools . i . Avoid designs that isolate neighborhoods . Provide traffic or pedestrian circulation within and between developments . J . Avoid or mitigate encroachment by incompatible land uses which can have a negative impact on the residential living environment. Mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, the use of open space, berms, dense landscaping vegetation, and similar buffers . k. Allow higher density multiple dwelling housing in areas within close proximity of existing support services and facilities, and where there is adequate access to collector and arterial streets . 1 Ensure new development includes design features such as buffering, _ screening, and spatial separation from collector and arterial streets; and from anticipated adverse environmentalimpacts including, but not . limited to, noise and air pollution. in. Link neighborhoods to each other, and to parks, schools and commercial centers via local streets or pedestrian trails . n. Ensure subdivisions are designed to avoid direct private drive access from and to major collector and arterial streets . o . Promote innovative subdivision design and housing products through the use of the planned unit development process and similar techniques . p . Avoid locating high density housing to primarily serve as a buffer or as a land use suited for absorbing negative impacts of adjacent land uses . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 26 Chapter 2 g . Promote proactive rather than reactive public safety measures through regular preparation of a five-year public safety strategic plan. h. Work cooperatively with the school district to determine the pedestrian needs of the student population and develop safe walking routes to school as needed. i . Encourage the consideration of appropriate crime control measures in the design and construction of public and private buildings . OBJECTIVE No. 4 : Enact and maintain policies and ordinances to ensure the safety and preservation of property. POLICIES . a. Require high standards of design and materials used for all structures . b . Maintain effective inspection services to ensure compliance with development and building codes . c . Ensure that all properties and structures are adequately maintained. d. Provide for fees to cover cost of development and preservation services . e . Identify in advance the need for redevelopment of existing residential structures and plan for such action. OBJECTIVE No. 5 : Provide for conservation and protection of the natural environment. POLICIES : a. Provide adequate regulations to prevent the development or existence of any industrial or commercial endeavor which will, through its operation, create a hazard to the environment. b . Require all developers to retain the natural environment as much as ch as the preservation of desirable trees, shrubs, land forms, possible`su swamps, and ponding areas . c. Effectively and uniformly regulate the development of structures and other land uses in or near flood plain and drainage areas . d. Nonconforming land uses should be eliminated over time. e. Develop and maintain communications with school district to ensure proper location of educational structures . f. Require that any waste disposal or processing facility meets or exceeds all federal, state, and local requirements, and be located in an area which will not jeopardize future development of the City. Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 32 Chapter 2 E. GOAL : HUMAN DEVELOPMENT Create an environment in which all citizens have the opportunity to develop their full F< potential. OBJECTIVE No. l : Encourage the development of abroad range of educational and learning opportunities for persons of all ages . POLICIES . a. Coordinate with the school district in school site selection. b . Encourage joint development and utilization of education, recreation, and social service facilities and services . c . A library should be retained within the City unless an affordable regional facility can be provided elsewhere that provides equal or better service. d. Encourage the location of preschool and day care facilities in the vicinity of major activity and employment centers . OBJECTIVE No. 2 : Promote leisure time opportunities and experiences which are rewarding for the individual and families . POLICIES . Gener 1 � a. Establish and maintain a comprehensive park and trail systems plan; efforts should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and recreation industry objectives . b . Park construction and maintenance should be aggressive and completed in a timely fashion. c . Develop a year-round system of recreation programs which appeals to all citizens of the community. d. Periodically conduct research and surveys to-identify cost effective ways of responding to community leisure needs . e. Major sites for park and recreation purposes should be acquired in advance of their actual need to assure a desirable location in relation to the area to be served. f. Establish and maintain a park and open space land dedication policy for new subdivisions . g. Acquisition and development of land for parks and trails should take into consideration potential conflicts with adjacent land uses and on-going maintenance costs . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 37 Chapter 2 h. City funds should be available for land acquisition in those cases where the Comprehensive Park Plan requires more open space than the developer is required to dedicate. Neighborhood Level i . Each neighborhood identified by this Plan should contain a centrally located park within walking distance of all homes, oriented to small child and parent activities rather than to organized athletic activities j . Facilities should be jointly shared with elementary schools where possible. Programs should reflect consideration of neighborhood needs and desires and should take maximum advantage of site capabilities . Community Level k. Major public open space and activity centers should be made available within each quadrant of the City, not only for environmental contrast and passive recreation, but for those major organized active recreation and indoor group programs which cannot practically be conducted at school centers . 1 . Major open spaces should be planned and provided, notwithstanding facilities owned or planned by other jurisdictions, and the plans should incorporate a variety of natural physical elements though not necessarily within every park area. in. Since the passive open space involved in City parks should be oriented to the unique natural features of the land which help establish the character for each quadrant of the city, a central location in each quadrant for City open space is not essential. n. If location and size permit, neighborhood park facilities can be incorporated into the design and development of a community park. o . A large nature-study preserve should be provided, possibly, though not necessarily as part of a City park. Small neighborhood preserves should be acquired through the land development process . p . A system of trailways should be developed in the City to link major areas of interest with special attention given to separation of pedestrian and bicycle traffic from vehicular traffic . q. The City should make plans to either acquire or develop desired facilities which happen to be privately owned as principal uses, rather than assuming those recreation facilities will continue . r. The preservation and treatment of open space shall be major considera. tion in planning and review of all types of development within the City. Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 38 Chapter 2 DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA These objectives and criteria are intended to guide residential development and redevelopment throughout the City; they complement the objectives and the development location criteria for the respective residential areas described in this Plan. Development Objectives 1 . Create and enhance neighborhoods that provide parks and open spaces, public access to natural amenities located on and adjacent to the site, and pedestrian linkages throughout and among adjacent neighborhoods . 2 . Incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum feasible extent. 3 . Provide pedestrian access to commercial and industrial centers, public lands, and schools . 4 . Avoid designs that isolate neighborhoods . Provide traffic or pedestrian circulation within and between developments. 5 . Avoid or mitigate encroachment by incompatible land uses which can have a negative impact on the residential living environment. Mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, the use of open space, berms, dense landscaping vegetation, and similar buffers . 6 . Allow higher density multiple dwelling housing in areas within close proximity of ` existing support services and facilities, and where there is adequate access to collector and arterial streets . 7 . Ensure new development includes design features such as buffering, screening, and spatial separation from collector and arterial streets ; and from anticipated adverse environmental impacts including, but not limited to , noise and air pollution. 8 . Link neighborhoods to each other, and to parks , schools and commercial centers via local streets or pedestrian trails . 9 . Ensure subdivisions are designed to avoid direct private drive access from and to major- collector -and-arterial streetsr 10 . Promote innovative subdivision design and housing products through the use of the planned unit development process and similar techniques . 11 . Avoid locating high density housing to primarily serve as a buffer or as a land use suited for absorbing negative impacts of adjacent land uses . High density housing should only be developed in those areas near support and commercial services. 12 . Support development designs that are tailored to environmentally sensitive areas containing rugged topography, wetlands, and woodlands . 13 . Code enforcement shall be used to keep illegal uses and physical deterioration from compromising the value and integrity of the housing stock within the community. 14 . Parking lots shall be screened to reduce theimpact upon adjacent uses . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 42 Chapter 3 RESIDENTIAL - RURAL DENSITY (R RD) Purpose This is a special classification for all land where urban services are unavailable . Land is often designated R-RD in order to preserve large tracts of land which can eventually accommodate orderly planned urban development. This is a special category because, over time, agriculture and related uses may not be the highest and best for all land in this classification. Thus, the official Land Use Guide Plan may parenthetically indicate other classifications for certain R-RD land. The alternate categories reflect the city's determination that the property would be eventually conducive to some urban, rather than rural use . R-RD is primarily determined by availability of public services rather than by proximity to natural features or to facilities such as streets or certain other land uses, unlike the other Residential designations . Agriculture is the primary allowable use, pending the approval and construction of urban services . This is a means of guiding the ultimate urban development of the community whereby the R-RD classification may reserve land for another classification, when urban services are physically available. Conversion of agricultural land for recreational open space uses in the rural service area is appropriate, provided the uses can function in a manner that is compatible with both agricultural uses and the lack of urban services . Such uses however should be planned and designed to facilitate eventual transition to urban services . Development Location Criteria All land where public sanitary sewer is unavailable is classified R-RD . While some land areas outside the MUSA are shown in other land use categories, these are intended to reflect a build-out condition and the R-RD Designation will be changed to reflect these ultimate uses when utilities become mailable. _ Density Maximum rural density is one dwelling unit per 40 acres . Minimum Requirements for Development Forty acres and frontage on a public street. Utilities No public utilities available. Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 44 Chapter 3 URBAN HIGH DENSITY (R-HD,) t Purpose This classification is characterized by dwellings other than single family detached houses at the higher residential densities . The dominant construction form is attached homes and apartments ; single family detached houses may be allowed in a Planned Unit Development. This classification is intended to provide an opportunity to create population centers and to accommodate the demand for affordable housing located near community activity areas . Development Location Criteria • Development of attached homes and multiple family dwellings is appropriate near major parks and other open space, along collector streets and near Town Center and other commercial centers . • The wide range of possible housing styles, and development design flexibility make it feasible to form a suitable transition to and from adjacent existing or proposed uses, and to relate new development to most terrain and other natural features . • Final density and development design will be a function of adopted zoning and subdivision standards and procedures . Density Densities up to 30 units per acre may be allowed, where developments with higher density and those with a mix of housing styles will primarily be realized in Planned Unit Developments . Density should be expressed through one or more zoning classifications which, among other standards, reflect various minimum lot dimension and area requirements . Minimum Requirements for Development A site area of at least 1 , 500 sq . ft. per dwelling unit for apartments should be retained; provided, a density reduction will be often necessary in environmentally sensitive and Shoreland Management Areas . The minimum area for Planned-Unit DevelopmEnts- -should-be-10acres- mi cres ri order -to- -provide for the open space and location of multiple family dwellings required for higher density developments . Public street frontage is required for all development, unless alternate access is expressly approved by the City for a Planned Unit Development or similar arrangement. Utilities All city utilities required; utilities must be at least under contract for construction in order to classify land R-HD . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 48 Chapter 3 Typical Uses Two4amily dwellings, townhouses , apartments, and other designs, 'including single family manufactured dwellings and single family dwellings by conditional use permit and/or Planned Unit Development; boarding houses ; schools ; churches ; recreational open space, parks, and play grounds with public utilities; and public buildings . Corresponding Zoning R4 (High Density Residential), including provision for Planned Unit Developments needed to implement the range of allowable densities and to express the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for this classification. Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 49 Chapter 3 COMMERCIAL BUSINESS AND OFFICE PARK (C-BO) F Purpose This classification is characterized by high-amenity planned developments which have a low traffic generation rate and a site utilization that is compatible with natural features. Primary uses are corporate headquarters ; and professional and administrative offices ; and limited research, development and manufacturing facilities . Related secondary uses such as restaurants where food is ordered and consumed on the premises, hotels, and other businesses having limited contact with the general public and no retail sale of products could be allowed as conditional uses . Office parks , often formed as Planned Unit Developments, can serve small professional services in a group setting whereas such uses might otherwise be located in retail centers or in scattered freestanding buildings . The high design standards should ensure compatibility with high density housing and the potential for shared parking, open space, convenient housing and service, and reduction of traffic generation onto public streets . Retailing should be allowed only as an accessory use when it is clearly incidental to the primary use. Development Location Criteria High level of transition to all proximate residential land and development; near arterial access points, i . e. , intersections of arterial and/or major collector streets ; high amenity features are very conducive to " gateway" recognition; adjoining or very near existing or planned industrial or multi-residential areas; may develop in conjunction with major commercial centers. Maximum Building Coverage 35 % with all yard and parking minimum standards met or exceeded. Minimum Requirements for Development 1 acre Public street frontage is required for all development, unless alternate access is expressly approved by the City for a Planned Unit Development or similar arrangement. Utilities All city utilities required; utilities must be under contract for construction for land to be classified C-BO . Typical Uses High amenity facilities for corporate headquarters, professional, administrative, executive, medical, research (exclusive of heavy manufacturing and distribution), and governmental offices without merchandising; very limited retailing incidental to the primary use, e. g. , news stands, Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 58 Chapter 3 HOUSING ANALYSIS, ISSUES AND NEEDS In general, the City's housing supply is adequate. The new luxury and move-up housing adds an important element to the City' s supply and gives it diversity, not typically experienced in the past except for the houses and properties on the lake. The lake itself probably adds 10 to 20 percent of the market value to the houses which abut the lake and for those with access rights through a nearby marina. The percentage of lower cost or affordable housing is likely to drop because : 1 ) many of these units are being remodeled, expanded or demolished and 2) the volume and cost of new construction. Within the next 10 to 15 years, virtually all the cottages or summer homes are likely to be eliminated. However, the actual number of affordable units could increase if low cost housing is included in some new subdivisions . A reasonable supply of single family, duplex, and townhouse rentals exist in the community. These categories total approximately 258 rental units, which amounts to 6 percent of the total single family, duplex, and townhouse housing stock. One apparent gap in the housing supply appears to be the inadequate supply of newer apartment units . A freestanding growth community or a mature suburban community could be expected to have from 25 to 30 percent of its housing stock in apartments or multiple family developments . Only 12 . 85 percent of Prior Lake's housing supply is classified as multiple family or apartment. This percent is likely to continue to decrease based on the market demand for single family housing . The vacancy rate could be an indicator that there is an adequate amount of multiple family and rental units in the community. However, Prior Lake does not have any new or modern apartment developments which incorporate amenities such as underground parking, swimming pool, community room, etc . This need and consideration of families who would occupy such units has been neglected primarily because the City' s focus has been on family units abutting the lake and the absence of high employment centers has not created the demand . In addition, lack of direct freeway access also affects this housing type. The new river crossing and State Highway 169 bypass along with the attraction of more industry to Prior Lake and increases in empty-nesters will justify construction of this type of housing. Housing conditions are excellent and benefit substantially by the amenity and opportunities rovidebPriorZake and ring Ira T�lakes contribute to some minor problems since recreational opportunities place additional burden on garages and houses relative to storing and maintaining recreational equipment. Too often the yards serve as areas for storage beyond a reasonable amount. Listed below are some of the assets and problems related to the lakes and the recreational opportunities . Assets 1 . The lake' s shape with its many bays provides a substantial shoreline which allows many properties to have access to the lake. 2 . Lake marinas tend to spread the beneficial value of the lakeimp act beyond the lake. 3 . Steep topography and wooded areas add interest and provide scenic views . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 101 Chapter 3 4 . The lake prevents through traffic from using the residential streets . i Problems 1 . Fifteen percent of the yards were categorized as inadequate because of outside storage of boats, trailers, inoperable vehicles or other conditions . 2 . Lake cabins and seasonal houses create some minor problems because they affect the visual conditions - but most are likely to be removed because of land values . 3 . Some site development problems are related to setbacks, hills, slopes and the lakes . For example, less than minimum front yard setbacks exist in some locations and garages are sometimes located directly adjacent to the road. (Special setbacks may be required when a road abuts a lake and when the lot is affected by a shoreland setback of 75 feet . ) 4 . Certain locations have an obsolete platting layout with dirt roads and a poor lot configuration. 5 . In some cases a lot is split by a street . 6 . Because some residential areas are faced with inappropriate on-street parking of trailers, some streets are signed prohibiting such parking, but the signs are often ignored. Other observations not necessarily attributed to the lake include the following : 1 . Parking of trucks, cars and other vehicles in front yards (grassy area) is quite ( f common. 2 . Inadequate yard conditions often times appears in pairs or more, suggesting that the manner in which one owner uses property affects how others use property. 3 . The size of the lot and the intensity of the yard deficiencies impact the impression of the neighborhood. For example, more deficiencies on smaller lots tends to establish a more blighting condition than would be the case with the same number of deficiencies on larger lots . If the house and garage are small, it can cause the owner to use the yard for activities and functions that might otherwise be conducted inside. 4 . There is a correlation between dirt roads and house and yard conditions . 5 . A substantial amount of infrastructure improvement and new housing is underway in - --- - -the-Shakope-e-M-dewankanton-Siou-x-communit"n-some4ocatlons-conditions are ---- - - — spotty because of older and obsolete dwellings , the number of dumpsters in the area and yard conditions . Housing is quite mixed in terms of type and size, ranging from mobile homes to large new houses . Some units have attached garages as well as detached garages . From a demographic stand point Prior Lake is becoming more diversified in terms of family size, age, and income. Housing costs are accelerating primarily because new subdivisions are offering substantial amenity, relatively large lots and construction of more housing for the move-up market. However, a significant amount of affordable and moderate cost housing remains available. Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 102 Chapter 3 c. Residential Development - Ensure that public services and on-site P improvements are completed at the time of residential development. d. Industrial / Commercial Encroachment - Protect residential areas from industrial and commercial encroachment to the maximum practicable extent, recognizing that the degree of encroachment may vary with isolated single family developments, which are part of an urban neighborhood. e. Developer' s Burden - The burden of a satisfactory transition from one density or dwelling type to another rests with the developer seeking development plan approval. f. Viable Neighborhoods - Discourage new residential subdivisions in isolated areas that have little or no potential to either develop into a viable neighborhood or to assimilate with an established neighborhood. g. Multiple family Development - Consideration of development plans for multiple family dwellings in areas so designated on the Land Use Guide Plan, should include the following design-related items : 1 ) New developments should not isolate existing single family dwellings by inhibiting pedestrian and/or vehicular access . 2) New development completely surrounded by single family dwellings , should be discouraged in favor of large scale planned unit developments which are more conducive to a mix of housing styles with shared amenities . 3 ) There should be convenient access to collector and arterial streets and to available transit so to not unduly contribute to congestion on local residential streets . 4) Large common open areas may provide an effective transitional use to other uses . h . Code Enforcement Program - Develop and consider for adoption a code enforcement program for existing housing . OBJECTIVE 3 - Open Space Preservation : Provide suitable passive open space for the preservation of the natural environment and the enjoyment of residents . POLICIES : a. Ponding and Wetlands - Retain natural ponding areas and, as applicable per state law, wetlands . b . Large Planned Unit Developments - Promote platting of large planned unit developments . { Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 106 Chapter 3 Policies r a. Density & Maintain a variety of residential densities (units per acre) ` ACTION STEPS As noted previously, the Comprehensive Plan has increased the range of permitted densities in the City from the previous high of 18 units per acre to 30 units per acre . The zoning ordinance expected to be adopted by March, 1997 will reflect this increase in maximum densities . b . Community structure concept: Utilize a community structure concept that is focused upon neighborhoods as the framework for developing and redeveloping residential areas . ACTION STEPS The Comprehensive Plan contains a section of specific objectives for each neighborhood in the City. These objectives cover virtually every aspect of community development, including land use, transportation, parks and open space, aesthetics, housing and capital improvements . These objectives will be addressed in the zoning ordinance amendments to the extent possible . Other items which are not zoning-related will serve as input to the City Capital Improvement Program. It is not possible to attach a time frame to this policy as most items will be accomplished incrementally on a year to year basis . c. Residential Developments Insure that public services and on-site improvements are completed at the time of residential development. ACTION STEPS The subdivision ordinance requires that public utilities and on-site improvements be installed before building permits or certificates of occupancy are issued. This process will be refined during the review of the subdivision ordinance which will be completed by March, 1997 . d. Industrial/Commercial : Protect residential areas from industrial and commercial encroachment to the maximum practicable extent, recognizing that the degree of encroachment may vary with isolated single family developments which are part of an urban neighborhood. ACTION STEPS The Comprehensive Plan proposes new commercial and industrial development in areas which are either remote from existing residential areas or where natural buffers such as wetlands are available. The new zoning ordinance will strengthen the requirements for screening and buffering between residential and non-residential land uses . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 113 Chapter 3 Protection of Watercourses The surface water management chapter details the policies and recommended actions to be taken to protect the streams and lakes within the City. In addition, the City enforces a Floodplain Management ordinance and has recently adopted significant amendments to the Shoreland Management ordinance consistent with the revised rules promulgated by the Department of Natural Resources . Unique and Endangered Species Objective 5 provides for the conservation and protection of the natural environment and related policies include developing regulations which will protect the environment and requiring developers to retain as much of the natural environment as possible . Presently, the City is not aware of the presence of any endangered species within the City. Prevention of Premature Development The City presently has a significant portion of its ' land area located outside of the Municipal Urban Service Area. Approximately 380 acres of this land is enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program. Additional acreage within the MUSA is enrolled in the Green Acres program . Policies in the plan include discouraging or prohibiting urban development beyond existing utility service areas . Extension of the MUSA is governed by the Metropolitan Council and presumably any requested extensions will be evaluated by the policies outlined in the Regional Blueprint, Mineral Extraction In 1991 , the City conducted a study of the potential for mineral extraction in the City. It was determined that there were no gravel deposits of significant commercial potential within the City and subsequently, in 1992, the City amended its ' zoning ordinance to eliminate mineral extraction as a conditional use in the Agricultural District. The current Zoning Ordinance allows excavation as a temporary use with approval of a conditional use permit. Historic Natural Resource Areas The natural resource area of greatest historical significance is Prior Lake and Spring Lake . Currently, the City enforces both Shoreland and Floodplain management ordinances which regulate development near Prior and Spring Lakes . In addition, the surface water management chapter of this plan contains a number of policies and recommended actions will act to minimize adverse impacts on these two major water bodies . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 117 Chapter 3 The growth of neighboring communities, the completion and opening of the new bridge over the Minnesota River at County Road 18 and State Highway 101 , the connection of County Road 21 with I-35 east of the City, and the development of intense commercial and recreational uses by the Mdewakanton Dakota Community will likely press development at a faster pace than anticipated by the projections made earlier in the planning process. The Metropolitan Council projections assumed residential development to proceed at a rate of 123 units per year. For the above reasons, the City has assumed a higher rate of growth. Constraints to development are both natural and man-made. Physical constraints include topographical conditions, water bodies, soil conditions, and surface characteristics (wetlands, for example) . These are relatively easy to quantify and usually are thus deducted from the total calculated amount of land in the MUSA. "Developable land," therefore can be determined as a net number of acres . There are some man-made constraints to development which are due to external forces beyond the City's effective control . Examples include the general economy and interest rates, especially as they apply to construction; state laws and programs than may mandate certain limits on development tools (tax increment financing, for example) and on the City's ability to generate revenues for services through taxes ; and regional policies regarding housing and the expansion of the MUSA. Other constraints include local policies that are defined by the City's vision for the future, including the desire for a rate of development that may be lower than private interests would prefer. Certain land uses may be preferred over others and this will be reflected in the City Plans and regulations . The development of the Mystic Lake complex can be viewed as an asset which provides employment opportunities, recreation and hospitality facilities available to the community, and a destination widely identified with the City) . It can also be perceived as a constraint upon City development as it represents competitive facilities that reduce opportunities for similar uses on taxable real estate, traffic impact upon neighborhoods that would otherwise be controlled if the destination uses and operations were under public jurisdiction, and regional agency agreements with the Mdewakanton Dakota Community that provide sanitary sewer via lines through the Rural Service Area despite regional policies that strive to retain the Rural Service Area notwithstanding the desire of landowners to also use the facilities . The City's primary asset is its people and its continuing desire to plan for the future, including redevelopment and preservation of areas that established the physical and social, and political character of the community. This plan accounts for the various assets and constraints through the various elements . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 124 Chapter 3 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING AND FUTURE TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM As with all municipalities, jurisdiction over the roadway system is shared among three levels of government; the state, the county and the City. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT) , through its Metro District, maintains the trunk highway system on behalf of the state and Scott County maintains the County State-Aid Highway (CSAH) and County Road systems . The remaining streets and roadways are the responsibility of the City. Traffic volumes at selected locations on the Prior Lake street system are shown in Figure 4-3 . These values are obtained from traffic counts made by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT) , Scott County and the City of Prior Lake . Multilane roadways are shown in Figure 44 . PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS Capacity improvements to state and county roads in the City of Prior Lake or the vicinity are already programmed including the following . • TH 13 --That portion of TH 13 that extends from CSAH 44 to CSAH 42 in the City of Prior Lake will be upgraded to improve capacity, operation and safety. The proposed design is a "two-lane divided " with left and right turn lanes at access points . The City of Prior Lake has signed an agreement with MN/DOT on appropriate intersection geometries . Funding has been approved for improvements at CSAH 12 (Spring Lake Rd. ) and for traffic signal coordination/interconnection from Fish Point Road to CSAH 44 . • CSAH 42--This roadway is currently four-lane from Ferndale Avenue to TH 13 . An upgrade to four-lane divided from CSAH 17 in Shakopee to Ferndale Avenue is programmed for 1999 , which will establish a continuous four-lane divided facility from CSAH 17 to the City of Apple Valley. Improvements to roadways outside of the City of Prior Lake over the next few years will also have major impacts on circulation between Prior Lake and adjacent municipalities : • CSAH 21 --A new roadway is programmed for construction in 2001 -2002 north of Prior Lake connecting CSAH 18 and CSAH 16 . It will ultimately connect to existing CSAH 21 at CSAH 42 , Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 134 Chapter 4 TRANSIT PLAN INTRODUCTION In keeping with the limited availability of transit service, the number of Prior Lake residents using transit is modest, although stable . Continued population growth in Prior Lake, severe congestion in the I- 35W corridor and transit services improvements will likely increase transit ridership . Human service needs include .transportation, which are met by a variety of transit options . The City supports the continued development of appropriate transit services in the area in coordination with the Metropolitan Council Transportation Division, the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority and other transit providers . The City will work with these and other organizations and individuals to identify the demand for public transit and to design new services and facilities . Well-utilized transit services can contribute to congestion relief on major roadways in the community while providing important mobility for certain residents . TRANSIT NEEDS The 1996 Metropolitan Council ' s Transportation Development Guide Chapter/Policv Plan ( 1996) identifies Prior Lake as generally lying in the "outer suburban" transit zone . The following services are most appropriate in that area: • Peak period express bus service • Ridesharing • Local circulation provided with small vehicles or dial- a-ride type vehicles EXISTING TRANSIT SYSTEM Regular Route Transit Service Located within the Metropolitan Council metropolitan transit taxing district, City residents are taxed for regional transit service through the property tax levy. Effective in 1990 , the City of Prior Lake "opted-out" of the regular metropolitan transit system and, along with other nearby communities, established locally designed transit services . The intent was to increase the level of service and to develop new services that were tailored to local needs . The opt-out cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Rosemount, Prior Lake and Savage joined together to create the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) . The MVTA Board of Commissioners includes representatives from each of the cities along with representatives from Dakota and Scott Counties . An Executive Director administers contracts for services with bus operators, develops funding agreements with the Metropolitan Council, conducts marketing programs , monitors existing transit services and develops new transit services . fit Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 154 Chapter 4 funding requirements, increase park dedication fees, dedicated park tax, bond referendum, gambling tax, etc . The 1997 Parks and Library Referendum was successful and included funds for the new Library/Resource Center, irrigation and lights at the Ponds, new playground equipment, Lakefront Park development, and Community Park/Athletic Complex development. This referendum will take care of some our community needs for many years to come . However, this is a one time development resource, we need to be aware of continued growth, equipment replacements , improvements , and ongoing maintenance of our parks and trails . Needs for Indoor Recreation Space In planning the fixture of the community consideration should be given to the need for indoor recreation space . The new Library/Resource Center will accommodate our dance program and be available for community events and meetings . The Dakota community currently has a facility which is open to the public for swimming and athletic activities on a fee basis . It may be possible to include space in a future school that would be available for recreational programming. Community school facilities have been very successful in other communities and communications with school district personnel would include the possibilities of a community school facility. Future Needs Assessment and Community As Prior Lake continues to develop it is critical to the success of the parks and recreation system that there is an ongoing analysis of the parks and recreation needs of the community. It is t imperative that a community survey be conducted so that future park and trail development is driven by the needs of the community and so that recreation programs are based on the community needs . Ongoing communications needs to exist between city staff and the community. This communication can be accomplished through surveys, program evaluations , public meetings, and open invitations to the public to attend Parks Advisory Committee meetings . As the community develops there will undoubtedly be an increase in school age children that will participate in sports and recreation programs . With this increase there will be demands for additional parks and athletic fields . As mentioned there is a conceptual plan that could meet the existing needs of the community but without further studies and surveys it would be difficult at best to try to determine the future needs of the community. Future parks , trails, and recreation programs should have a direct correlation to the demographics and socio-economic status of the community. r 4 Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 200 Chapter 5 PLANNING AND LAND USE General Wastewater collection and treatment needs are dictated by the land use, population density, and the planning period for the study area. Each new connection to the system adds to the wastewater flow in the sanitary sewer system. Land use and population densities have been developed and discussed in the City ' s overall comprehensive plan. This information will be utilized in conjunction with the planning periods defined here to analyze the City ' s wastewater system . Planning Period The planning period for municipal engineering projects generally coincides with the useful life of the particular utility system . Under normal use conditions, mechanical equipment such as lift station pumps is expected to last about 20 years with good maintenance . Underground structural components like collection system pipes are typically designed for 50 years of service . For this update, the MCES has requested that the year 2020 be used for the planning period. In order to consider the "worst case", the analysis will include a projection of the ultimate development of the City of Prior Lake including all of the current City limits and the { "orderly annexation area" that may develop at some time . Land Use The City of Prior Lake Land Use Plan is presented and discussed in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan. Basic data from the City' s Land Use Plan will be used for projecting the future wastewater needs of the City. The current MUSA is entirely within the City limits but it does not include all of the land within the City limits . ' Development of land within the MUSA requires the extension of municipal sanitary sewer services . Land outside the MOTSA cannot be connected to the municipal sewer system and must be developed with larger individual lots to accommodate onsite wastewater treatment. As the land inside the current MUSA is developed, there will be interest in expanding the MUSA to include additional land within the current City limits and possibly, the orderly annexation area. k Since it is difficult to anticipate exactly which parcels of land will develop first, the City is utilizing an "undesignated MUSA" for the defined area within the City limits and the orderly annexation area. The documentation required by the MCES for the undesignated MUSA is included in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 254 Chapter 7 population increase has stabilized since 1990. Population projections for this report were based on the Prior Lake 2010 Comprehensive Plan and discussions with City planners . On this basis and also based on the traffic analysis planning results , the ultimate population of Prior Lake has been calculated to be 28 ,950 . The past populations from 1980 to 1995 appear on Table 3 -9 in Chapter 3 . Also shown in the table are the population projections for the years 2005 , 2010, and 2020 . The past population and population projections are shown graphically as Figure M in Chapter 3 . Table 3 .9 in Chapter 3 also presents numbers of households and the persons per household ratios . This data indicates that, while the total population and number of households are increasing in Prior Lake, the number of persons per household is decreasing. This is a trend that is occurring throughout the Twin Cities at this time. The City of Prior Lake Land Use Plan is presented and discussed in the "Land Use" section of the comprehensive plan. Basic data from the City' s Land Use Plan will be used for projecting the future wastewater needs of the City. The current MUSA is entirely within the City limits but it does not include all of the land within the City limits . Development of land within the MUSA requires the extension of municipal sanitary sewer services . Land outside the MUSA cannot be connected to the municipal sewer system and must be developed with larger individual lots to accommodate onsite wastewater treatment. As the land inside the current MUSA is developed, there will be interest in expanding the MUSA to include additional land within the current City limits and possibly, the orderly annexation area. Since it is difficult to anticipate exactly which parcels of land will develop first, the City is utilizing an "undesignated MUSA" for the defined area within the City limits and the orderly annexation area. The documentation required by the MCES for the undesignated MUSA is included in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan , PAST WATER USAGE RECORDS One of the most important aspects of any comprehensive water study is having a clear understanding of how a city's consumers use water. With this information and accurate records of past usage, projections can be made of future water demand. A course of action can then be developed to meet this demand. The City of Prior Lake maintains records of the annual volume of raw water pumped from its wells, as well as the volume of water sold to its customers . These records permit evaluation of all the components of water demand-wthe water used by residential, commercial/industrial, and institutional users. The demandimposed on a water system can be defined as the total water consumed by users of the system in a specified period of time. Typically, daily and hourly time periods are evaluated. Daily demands are usually evaluated on the basis of average day and maximum day requirements. Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 271 Chapter 8 APPENDIX A MISSION The following Mission Statement was adopted by the City Council on February 3 , 1997 : "The City of Prior Lake is committed to serving the common good of its residents by promoting community values, environmentally sensitive community development, robust business growth, financial stability, safety, and diverse recreational opportunities. " VISION The Vision of ,the community at full development was also adopted February 6 , 1995 , as part of the Strategic Plan. The ultimate community should be comprised of development which is balanced among residential, commercial, and other land uses. PRIOR LAKE STRATEGIC PLAN THE VISION Adopted February 6, 1995 Revised February 3 , 1997 Revised April, 1998 Revised March, 1999 "At buildout the City of Prior Lake will be balanced between residential, commercial and business. Strong neighborhoods and homeowner associations will characterize most developments, neighborhoods will be connected by transportation amenities for pedestrians and/or motor vehicles. Platting will be encouraged through Planned Unit Developments which preserve natural features. While single family dwellings will be the predominant housing type, townhomes (for empty nesters) and multifamily developments on major arterials are expected. Annexation will be evaluated and a determination made regarding land areas to incorporate within the City. "Neighborhood commercial centers will predominate, although a few community commercial centers will exist. Commercial development will be localized primarily to major arterial intersections involving State Highway 13, County Road 42, County Road 44, County Road 21, County Road 12, County Road 82 and 83. One regional center is expected at the intersection of County Roads 42 and 83. With respect to business, the focus will be on developing a mixture including office, light industrial, high-tech and light manufacturing. Office, warehouse and industrial developments are expected along CR 21 . One or more corporate office Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page A- 1 Appendix A ■r..r�r.r..r.r+ / all asIiii�l'. naC�, n1 A • ' . • Mill -11 Liptooele.m = :pulp„p� i 111 1 i� jl► , • � ivy! �I alb CCS 1�1. //•_II■' !411 a . Gu• — ill ' ri,wk ' •I•rl :■I■ iQ� \ �, � �� � e� $��1 _ ll , I=7 " MUM Ilk as sm n IN q 4 a nu,�\''.- .urs PIP ��� – ►a " I ��.�.. � '� ► ♦noon �. �� ' �� ��1\ € _ �r II >. . 4�ai� is �4ri a/► pip l� �.innrranl, it 9'{i 1t1 = ;{� 1{III 17 J � ' .I,....J S °.r C' Jill ♦ GPool .i milur :mnl .'IIIIe .e .n,rr :' 0. =�iaa10111 F 1 ��. a% = ,,. E' y���p�`�__ 11 IN I! I -�'� • ('/ u` ,\ ,1MEAN.L�c ,w4 _ t _ :i �� IIIIIIIII III - /f: ��:�I =��'i7.1��� 1 ■ � nnul�iilnm ;=s tlil , Vii€£ F" ''a Jim Rye n�w°'v��� l. ■,� ���� i ���f� r r .a{}}}}�- ••. � �. ��anSlir "� :E 3fL1 /,�ae� 1 - : ,_ ■ rii■ '7/ I PIP j ! rrr1'r `mt`. r• >N�.' �iA'.'2 sell I G . Iupp►O V n'7 at 1 6 4 nirr nl� � �� '� � l' 1. � r snrl/4/I �IIl` ie �1lm ■r!�. i nr 7N ra11111II� Irr = �,■. a 1--� M `^`�C • tuw ullIN ■r :; 4 d ;I}r is 1==If It I 1 ►` � ,//,►.!! moi._ . nmi �t I// �/ 11nf( =, nu I I ■��.uL9!: e■ , full■,\ -� ° - nmI l UI�IInu� - �' — �w- rS ■ ` � ■ , •I ( IIII IIr1= - �Ei �� ' _ - C . i � �. wlt® �/ ••i l�ryll}}}IC �/ ii�� a� .I�z :i'7re.n 0 4 • �■d�'/I► ■au. : ■poi\!€ G��- `� � �� � �AR nQlllnlilh}����€IIIr�aR: -- .'p'iq In - bbb ul ♦ p 'rlillll`�'L�-u�� 41 C lt�*W;vj fill ■. . , , gyp ?\ u Sno mill 's . yam t ► L7 . �� — ��. — 6am ON mama 7 :i1d1� ' S Sit32�'t•.r-f -i:-,�_«:H ,,��`' �, w — �� �� ►� C :i ii ��vs �� e� ' may) €$iSEI FYF ': . . A'•V Si ' ':� = llFnn•INII �t RIF if • jtjkF�. '�'.Ivfin'i I '� . �� �',� ■��.L I �► l°B'�E.� O��a' } 9 •�In vIll go ■� ■■YY ffi §. 33 l` Lq .NINE HVAN r g { 11 Zed< 10. 0. . c Lb = Ap n 7: fl n E in �88 u M.a 0 1 $ o i W 4 p _ �W N O n I v_ OY p I 6s G '..� 0 n ,` n a5 i Fil I""y p 1. Fy p a 'n I ' p o r Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 129 Chapter 4 � 1 Agestil =� a' -- . �I. .. Am IlPAF ME ... ,II �� �IpP , = 44 a l In oil son ff I% IN pas ame in I� on i ► .1 ,1``, 7 gold voldne W age Wallis 4 ease ON : ,, o m Or � %Ii — r— - —24 pwill = 4 4 me. to top 411 0 AN 0 of a 0 add do ��� 71 � ■ uuSo 177 win ads40 '. 1 No lied ads, go%a Emam IN 4 : Ha IN AS a no load N a ad add • is 4 Ad Nloll IF N, so usnall .11 wag am N . 401 a_ No Air a j on Is .Esaffiapan 11111111 too� . _' - , , I, ■ _�� ■ x• I/ON � i : � IIll • 11 • an Fees - : .'_ AS INN an 1 41 WN As ' al ON 00 it allI,, -V11: 1 ior P Not �: .1 long da as asleep mon as al lia ;,' .�;�j ■ Is Ile ; , SII. i •. . 111 '`ago N, Sager, - - = . i:• ; �l,.ti.W :� �/ ,<. = � it Oil - _ � �' ON 11:1,:.ad stilt 61; ; ,) VON _,Q% migivlift �, ► a �: ; 1111; — " �_ I�I INN :I _ / � dlll �� I-1�1. � % . � � 1�� 'r:- so � r ia !'. T�`INo IF go to, a , , (,• r 5►� got MGM It - Jim NON !Ipir, to ed let , OWN a, mer pro a Ads A milli No an No VIA !s rbffN4 ad aft goo No as Is NO ,. - -It, too t do ,Joelan Lee ON 4 , am .10 ; .1111 —I �, 11111 .IN :,.�1� •; a !G , . , .a � Of I to and I I " 11111 . 7 = =gill 9 ZVI P I. Good . �� Vii ': x111111 . ; ' �� ., = Y '.: : : ' _ lo: ONE ",I — we IN - , -ill, , as an go It ANN sit t IF - loom Vow m� LNU:J r � a z � � F Z � F � 1Yi I O avIH w anal 9 p ® ® 4 Ii � • IIZoc oQ s = S W J . , g - � � z j ,� 4 a n. w X E- a !y Z 3 � i Z N W Ii i (� (� � W 3O � is aw = j � Jci : Q ¢¢ co � Lial 1 0 LO Ir 93 C5 W 0LL I z �LU a N F- to W - o C W X J = � j w W W s 0rLz d CC EE 0 I 0 � Coo CiA oY lits I' 1 o T(_, 1 io b mat E T- I _= Cd i 1. . _ _N 1s • __ m ! . 1 4 IL I _ . � Ea I ( 'k__, I �'Vol I •! ( no 33 m ms 's 'F N to x lam its i i a 00 ZZZZ i z m � 0 N 0 0ui CD w J F. p mor ra» � HOVAVS lHdOXVHS J ® ♦ • � I rb � k Kqa dw " i } y9 � o m d e � M �y1 W Q a a :vi z . o h 664 a o J 4 O Uk Q I g F = b 3 4 sn, a � x OL X � wn x ® HHdOXVHSo o O3 = 0 v° a W • ® J K ® �N tExM 1 W a � SHAAKOPEE x rn ' i SHAKOP ® ' i 00 4ffl�_ �1 til 40 ' 5 �` I over4 a eprior Lak4 0 cn a g 11'e1h: M — �4 1 1 SAVAGE It Q Peer a Prior Lake . ,j seatNo tens ,.., FOMONAL PARK _T„y w A u A d @ y+r m l spring Lake al ice L n EXISTING MUSA [BOUNDARY FUTURE MUSA SEARCF (CITY LIMITS o z000 4000 - SEWERCOf�� I� I1� � U11 � �� � 0V � PRIpR � FIGU RE WSB p N m & ,�. IVA MUSA BOUNDARY �iy C��IS�� � � � NES I $ bd VS 1 `L Q yp © O ® e 2 _ e � 5 aesegzp " • B HDVAV5 I a ° • Lqd0)IVHS "" # 0 zw u,w ! d. � ® 1 1 � A a VL W h wl del a � g a lip `1 • b d Tv, vyq O p tl ® To v ® £a 0 � a ® i HHd0 ?IHHS MNsmartgrowth - Citizens Profile - Jerry Stelzel Page 1 of 1 l Drov p1pp rtly n iss in .4, glo aj ,p ;Ppp y., nno CITIZENS mnsmartgrowth gallery Citizens Showcase news 0A Farmer Fights To Save Agricultural Land perspectives Few people have had as great an influence in protecting Dakota County agricultural land as forum Jerry Stelzel over the past 25 years . Stelzel helped craft the Agricultural Preserves Act of resources e 1980 while serving on a Metro Council committee . The law helps farmers , through tax breaks and other incentives , to maintain their properties as farms rather than sell to developers . Stelzel supports smart growth initiatives because they help preserve rural areas . The 83 -year-old former farmer says his main goal is to retain the rural atmosphere of the county's 13 townships . He lives in Empire Township , not far from Rosemount and Apple Valley , where two thirds of the land remains agricultural . Dakota County's mixture of towns , cities and farms has a great appeal , resulting in tremendous population gains . Ironically , the high quality of life that drew people to Dakota County may be threatened by the demands of a larger population . Stelzel ' s work in Dakota County resulted in his selection as Minnesota Leader of the Year Award in 1987 , Dakota County Man of the Year in 1981 and commendations from seven other organizations ranging from the International Lions Club to the Dakota County Planning Commission . With a laugh , he likens his civic involvement to a "disease" which captured him years ago . He sees his political career as less about him , and more about Empire Township . " It' s about what you can do for the township , not what the township can do for you , " says Stelzel , putting a twist on a famous line . And he ' s been doing it for the township now for more than three decades . a braUght to Yp'� by It 1V1ctmpolzkar m tropobtan C�iv�,rit un http : //www .metrocouncil . org/mnsmartgrowth/citizens_stelzel .htm 1 / 15 /01 Loss of rural land accelerating in state , study finds Page 1 of 2 news freetime travel homezone cars. com workavenue shopping communities Metro / Region Nation ! World Politics Business Sports Variety Opinion Fun & Games Talk rr, - 1 Pr T*Itt Enfr tete 'YuClri + , _ i. I all You Se METROIREGION Tools Loss of rural land accelerating in state , study a E-mail this story finds 9 Print this page J' Find related David Peterson items Star Tribune Thursday , January 11 , 2001 Days after the U . S . Census Bureau reported on just how hot Minnesota' s growth was during the 1990s , another federal agency has arrived to point out some of the cost of that growth. The rate at which development gobbled up rural land doubled during the mid-' 90s , according to newly released findings from the nation' s National Resources Inventory, the U. S . Department of Agriculture' s twice -a-decade effort to track what' s happening with farmland. The amount of developed area in Minnesota rose 12 percent in the most recent stretch, 1992 to 1997 , compared with about 6 percent in the two previous five -year periods . "What whacks me across the head like a two-by-four, " said Scott Elkins , state director of the Sierra Club , " is the fact that after people have been living in this state for 150 years , what sort of weirdness is going on that just in one five-year period we saw a 12 percent increase in the amount of urbanized land? That' s a remarkable increase over five years . " Other findings : . The rate at which rural land is being lost is slower than the department reported a year ago , when it first released data on 1992 - 97 . The estimate then was closer to a tripling of the rate of development. A computer glitch was later found to have thrown off all the data, which had been trumpeted by anti- sprawl groups . • All of the development that has occurred in Minnesota since the inventory began, in 1982 , has only managed to trim a sliver off of Minnesota' s vast land resources : land classed as "rural' declined from 45 . 8 million acres to 45 . 4 million, or 1 . 1 percent. It' s not clear what is leading to accelerating rates of development, whether it' s sheer population growth, more affluence or other factors . Data from the 2000 census that will emerge soon will help to clarify the matter. Elkins argues that although there' s still lots of rural land, it' s troubling that the rate at which land is being developed is climbing . It' s not clear, however, whether it' s a blip or a long-terin trend. Some experts maintain that as baby boomers at their peak earning years begin to leave their big homes and big yards for townhouses , summer cabins and Sun Belt retirement enclaves , the rate of loss of rural land will decline . Another question is whether the loss of rural land is accelerating simply because the state' s population is growing so rapidly, and not because land is being used http : //www . startribune . com/viewers/qview/cgi/gview . egi ?template=metro_a cache&slug=lan . . . 1 / 11 /01 Loss of rural land accelerating in state , study finds Page 2 of 2 more wastefully. The Census Bureau reported late last month that Minnesota' s population gain during the ' 90s (544 , 380) was nearly double its gain during the 1980s (299 , 129) . That compares with the new findings of a doubling of the rate of urbanization between 1987- 92 and 1992 - 97 . Elkins agreed that the comparison is intriguing, but said that, from another perspective , it looks as if land is being used more wastefully . "The population is . increasing at about 1 percent a year, " he said, "but if rural land is being developed at a rate of 12 percent in five years, then each person is using about 250 percent as much land as existing residents , if you look at it that way. " The area' s hot economy, on the other hand, definitely plays some role, he said. " People are making money and they want their piece of land. There' s nothing wrong with affluence , but it' s interesting that once they get there they want to close the door behind them . " University of Minnesota geographer Fraser Hart, who has studied the issue of lost farmland extensively, argued in a speech last summer that compared to what we have as a nation the loss is "hardly noticeable . " He added : "Most lost farmland was in marginal agricultural counties with soils of low inherent fertility and topography unsuited to modern fann machinery . . . . Much of this land probably never should have been cultivated in the first place . " David Peterson can be contacted at david. a. peterson(startribune. cont Return to top © Copyright 2001 Star Tribune . All rights reserved . http : //www. startribune . com/viewers/gview/cgi/gview . cgi ?template=metro_a_cache&slug=lan . . . 1 / 11 /01 Subject : Vierling Farm ]Date : Fri , 12 Jan 2001 17 : 18 : 16 EST From : KMSandvik@aol . com To : Sfawcett@qwest . net DATE : January 12 , 2001 TO : Kelly & Fawcett, P .A . FROM : Kathleen and David Sandvik 5410 Hampton St. NE Prior Lake 952496-3658 RE : The Vierling Farm My husband and I may not be able to attend the public hearing on January 16 , 2001 . We wanted to assist the Vierling Family in their effort to enroll their property into the Agricultural Preserve Program so that their land may remain farmland in accordance with their wishes : Please communicate our support on behalf of the Vierling family . Thank you for your assistance , Kathleen Sandvik I of l 1 / 13/01 8 : 47 Al January 11 , 2001 Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. Attorneys at Law 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 Re : Vierling Farms To whom it may concern : . We live directly across the street from the Vierling farm and definitely do not want to see them gone . Our first reason for wanting to see them re- enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program, is that it is their land, has been in their families for years and they should be the ones to determine what they do with their land. It is a little scary to think that someone can take someone else ' s property from them for any reason. The second reason is we enjoy having a farm across the street from us . It gives us the illusion of living in the country . We will not b able to attend the hearing . Mi ael & Linda Smith 5313 140'h St NE Prior Lake, Mn 55372 cc : City of Prior Lake January 11 , 2001 Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. Attorneys at Law 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street S aint Paul, MN 5 5101 Re : Vierling Farms To whom it may concern : We live directly across the street from the Vierling farm and definitely do not want to see there gone . Our first reason for wanting to see them re-enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program, is that it is their land, has been ill their families for years and they should be the ones to determine what they do with their land. It is a little scary to think that someone can take someone else ' s property from them for any reason. The second reason is we enjoy having a farm across the street from us . It gives us the illusion of living in the country . We will not be able to attend the hearing . Kerry Smith 5299 140t` St NE Prior Lake, Mn 55372 cc : City of Prior Lake P1an»ina Cnmmissioil City of 113riwr Lake Dear gir$_ 1 ha'a r�av beer 0 r'�rc�-dti[e'AM of ✓ .3 +x^' 6 IAO hth es}. NE asince kf6O . Mly hoinne is located in, the First Addition of North SN11nre 0a_kq. T am in?ab10 to attend the Pla__i T� ling C onimissi0n meeting on January iv . Since it is Jluphed in, u e rs *Ce that i iiiii �t w at the iileefii'ag tai have ilio Vo1Ge heard T alp submitting n7V written comments to be read at that meeting: Tf any fi xt}ler comments by me are de�lred, i alll rillhila tv ts�id to thPrili, The rproperty directly across- from RW ilnngf%- haS been farmed for as Intra as T have lived here, grid lt3i'ia aJ4l�fre T vl"uilgilt +uua l'aC,ilae. My family has had lard Ali ADalnr Tlake S1nCe the T � 6u a. The farAn y farm has been an important part of Prior T.�ake 's - history, -and still is a positive part of Priorulna rarer narratives uttitaalla c (< ' t< f Pi in f n t c ai'+ I tt+>v. iv went uv6uaary uta+t:a V shown by the �. of `o mor ake to aard t=aiinm iAlln white rural Comlj n)nity iS a detriment to- the quality nflife--we- have as- residents of-Prior Lake. T support the Vieriing family in then, deaire to Continue farming then, land, The Planning Com mission should amend their Land Use Map to designate their land as Rural Density, �inGerely, Karen T, (Koskelin) T .ilcy 1l 22nd A`.%. J �,� . I , uoarara P 1 SI�AK ® PEE 31 > °� � w3 4 I � ® Y SHAKOPEE w, MWLAW TR - - - - - -1 I — -- sw¢1aAss ca . ,� adcoar Pik i y fqQ 0La s u <9> 140th ST. EGUJ Cst a IaiO109 R. a CEWMV010 ST 0• u _: •-- - ® Has © ` a (� La r o e FL 4 ms� o c on C srtrTao ar ' • c,. � 07ATP2r h� 1a Myst c a w g� LakPri or Lake Dams dS • 4 5< M )> a Read V Inland '�' �. >• �'" 152nd R. ® ' d tikVD SONG $A 154thnv • • u. 'I� R. u qa v A YN rn 4 Cff N. Howa d cti FRMd Q k 11 �f SAVAGE i Lak � R. ' 1 R. � C5s -� • • a y M wo00 DRi j o qr v 1 ISP er :89s9 ji l'r .1 ' .g Sf. ' Prior Lake sJ �e ANwu a F 1.40pg Tr" SPRING LAKE sp O �� < • • RR ¢ r > F � U REGIONAL. PARK � I 'twin We � � � ' COEs R. _ � � © �� • S � � ye � � v Car a ` r lYtdQ a rrc�° ova p d ER Lok 17 trod. 12 s, am P% � � _ _ 13 '� Spring Lake mcz* I T, `1 � � Cry al ke S �oP - a LEGEND LWWA ■ m swm O` j ) Iwnenalt ae aoa A o ravxw r 174 � yST. _ Rice - - i 12t 15 -- — --- ' r (Q( 2t w. �a 2r Iw. oa �d, s � o mo ldee y� OR t•1119 refit r ew, IEYYL3tgym a •� -- - U_ I C 22nd NE, s SHAKOP IES, s l SHAKOPE W, VIOGMAZ TR j� - - - - - s:�rc•tass da. , onc�tonr ter+. Pike � H < `" La r of P�9 u i ® t n `12 42_ MAN ® q¢C Q i{),LPiCV Si. 1 ) �• - _ ¢ ( w`' CIO ., G Gp E " 1tiVA' i 9 2f A. QVEs V tat (:L4 I rp � 6 -eal.odc � La °p7; 1 ® c ys "�` t ,s Mti a `9 LT. da" `pLq o h tF' ._ s't• F �'' q Prior La ke � � LEGEND w s 3' Lam' ot"'- :`m. Y WATERMAIN <itLOS pat SgEE 6tit. -�. _ ti'6 j aWES IR '� tq 4 WATERMAIN � 1 4 = o � � °' � A ERMAIN RASPEES �§ da. � o , `9y W o air r?� ---� = 8" WATERMAIN lk " Pnpr11 sonN Q 4 Rued°s isiond Island 8 = 8" WATERMAIN s = 10" WATERMAIN ��' � � xs � j 12" WATERMAIN tsnn sf, c < ® E, � y �' • � = 16" WATERMAIN r 5 � 20" WATERMAIN t7 a tk fi '� cut�v' �E'st. F ' �� �� p 24" WATERMAIN HYDRANT r H o w a d fauwNr c C) mai = VALVE j Lake ass d SAVAGE AG ® � = REDUCER t oe. L� O ® A.R. MANHOLE 4 ® 9SS1n Prior LCI �CG = WELL tFf' #"•� 7 SI ¢ a Lo" PI geAtwu y = WATER TOWER Si. L LOZfpp aui °� � B3dSON dR. " ♦ tU141\ � r' /t Y 3 SPRING LAKE /; D Island ` co�oawo a ® ® �$ $ u `— -- — REGIONAL PARKO a s N p j d S ✓ u Tey St, n w O 1 YOOU z 13 ? P�ti yg GN. %0 M a r 39 S: a mQdt Q N R uRol F T ¢ < < ti cg. in e' iron sir' ,. Lak — ?earn sr. E. e sr SI i qw 6 s1. ;wn n a 3 sr. 12 t7dro sr cL,,, s. pA , A n _ 1a Spring Lake �jb � oa � . 13 Cry al Lo e to sr. E. �U VA JS E RA M I N P M A ST, RicLak a@ P° = FIGURE 8 1 ZZ s Clea �" NraLE ps+. 4, � Lake 0 PRION CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT P �JNNESON MEETING DATE : MARCH 19 , 2001 AGENDA # : 9A PREPARED BY . JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR REVIEWED BY . DON RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR AGENDA ITEM : CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP FROM THE WHD (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) DESIGNATION AND THE C-BO (COMMERCIAL BUSINESS OFFICE PARK) DESIGNATION TO THE RURAL DENSITY DESIGNATION FOR 320 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24 , TOWNSHIP 115, RANGE 22 (Case File #00-084) DISCUSSION . History : Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling have filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C -BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land . This property is presently zoned A (Agricultural) . The east 160 acres of the site is designated as C-BO (Business Office Park) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the west 160 acres is designated as R-L/MD (Low to Medium Density Residential) . The applicants have requested this amendment so that the land will qualify for the Agricultural Preserve Program . The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 . At that meeting, the applicants ' representatives distributed a packet of information. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing in order to review this information . On February 12 , 2001 , the Planning Commission continued the public hearing to consider this additional information as well as additional testimony. Following the testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and discussed this request. After considerable discussion, the Planning Commission considered a motion to approve this request. This motion failed on a 2 -2 vote . The Planning Commission also considered a motion to deny this request . Again, the 1 : \00files\00compam\00-084\00-084 cc. doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 447 -4230 / Fax (952) 447 -4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER motion failed on a 2 -2 vote . Rather than send this item to the City Council without a recommendation, the Commission tabled action on the request until February 26 , 2001 . On February 26 , 2001 , the Planning Commission continued discussion of this item, but did not reopen the public hearing . After considerable discussion, the Commission considered a motion to recommend approval of the proposed amendment . This motion failed on a 2 -2 vote . The Planning Commission also considered a motion to recommend denial of this request . This motion also failed on a 2 -2 vote . Ultimately the Planning Commission voted to send this application to the City Council with no recommendation. Copies of the minutes from the January 16 , 2001 , the February 12 , 2001 , and the February 26 , 2001 meetings are attached to this report . Current Circumstances: The total site area consists of approximately 320 acres . The property is currently used for agricultural purposes . There is a farmstead and outbuildings located in the southwest corner of the site . The site also includes some wooded areas and some wetland areas . Access to this property is presently from Pike Lake Trail . The property is also adjacent to CSAR 42 and CSAR 18 . Sewer and water services are available to serve this site from the existing services located in CSAH 42 . Extension of these services will occur with the development of the property . Adjacent to the north of this property is agricultural land, currently zoned R- S (Rural Subdivision) and designated for Low to Medium Density Residential uses . Also to the north is property located within the City of Savage . To the south, across CSAH 42 , are residential subdivisions , zoned R4 and designated as R-L/MD . To the east are several large lots with single family dwellings , zoned A and designated as C -BO and R-L/MD . To the west are large lots zoned A and designated as R-HD and R-L/MD . This property has been designated as part of the Primary MUSA Allocation Area in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan . Properties within this area meet the criteria for the extension of services . The Issues: Lands presently classified as Rural Density are areas where urban services are unavailable, at least until 2020 . However, even though services are presently not available, this designation is intended to accommodate future urban development. The Vierling property is currently enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program . This program was established in 1980 to preserve long-term 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00-084 cc. doc Page 2 agricultural areas in the Metropolitan area, and to recognize farmland as a long-term use . Under the law, land is no longer eligible for the program when the Comprehensive Plan no longer identifies the land for long-term agricultural uses . In 1993 , the property owner initiated the removal of the east 240 acres of the property in question from the Agricultural Preserve Program . The land will be officially removed in 2001 . The current Comprehensive Plan designation for this area was first established in 1995 , and was based, in part, on the actions of the owners to remove the land from the Agricultural Preserve Program . In 2000, the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program . The City refused this request on the basis the property no longer qualified for program participation because it failed to meet the statutory requirements . On January 16 , 2001 , the applicants ' representative submitted a packet of information to the Planning Commission . The attached letter submitted by the firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P . A . , representatives of the applicants, contains several reasons they believe the Comprehensive Plan should be amended. The following is the staff' s analysis of these reasons . Historical Reasons : The letter suggests the Vierling farm should be preserved for its historical value . There are no structures of historical significance on this site . Farmland, in itself, does not have historical value . In fact, on page 4 of the letter, the applicants note the land will be developed at some time in the future . Logistical Reasons . 1 . The City is not prepared for High Density or Office Parks The letter suggests the City is unprepared for development of the Vierling property. The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to identify future land uses . In conjunction with this , the plan also identifies potential road connections and allows the City to plan for the extension of sewer, water and other utilities and other public services . Specific site development occurs at the time of the development of the property. The letter also states the proposed zoning of this property will also affect the real estate taxes . First of all, the property is currently zoned 1 : \00files\00compam\00-084\00-084 cc. doc Page 3 A (Agriculture) and the City has no plans to change that designation at this time . Although the Comprehensive Plan identifies this site for other uses , the Zoning Ordinance recognizes the existing use and investment in the property . Any change to the current Zoning designation of this property would most likely be initiated by the property owner. Second, the attached letter from Leroy Arnoldi , Director of Taxation for Scott County, notes taxes are based on the actual use of the property, not the Zoning classification. As long as the property continues to be used agriculturally, it will be taxed on that basis . This letter also suggests the financial implication of removal of this property from the Agricultural Preserve Program is $ 1 . 50 per acre, or about $480 per year. A comparison of taxes for this site is attached to this report . a. Water Service. The letter states water service is not available to serve this site . In fact, trunk water mains are located in CSAH 42 , directly in front of this property, and can be extended to serve this site . The City has also received a permit to construct a new well near The Wilds development, and will commence construction this year. b . Sewer Service. The letter also states sewer service is not available to serve this site . Trunk sewer mains are also located in CSAH 42 , directly in front of this property, and can be extended to serve this site . Furthermore, the letter states this property is not within the MUSA. As stated in the previous staff report, the City does not have a fixed MUSA. Rather, the City has utilized an undesignated MUSA. This approach allocates a certain number of acres for development . The City has the flexibility to determine which land may be used as part of that allocation. The Comprehensive Plan identified a Primary Area of MUSA Acreage Allocation, based on the availability of municipal services . This property was included within that allocation. c . Traffic Considerations . The letter states CSAH 42 is not capable of handling the traffic generated by the development of this site . CSAH 42 is a 44ane highway, classified as an arterial street. On the east side of the property is CSAH 18 , which was also recently approved, and which is classified as a minor arterial . The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on CSAH 42 is approximately 13 , 000 trips , and the ADT on CSAH 18 is approximately 3 , 500 trips . The roads are projected to accommodate up to 27 , 000 ADT and 7 , 500 trips respectively by 2020 . The land use designation of this property was based, in part, on the fact it is accessible from these two roads . As the property north of CSAR 42 develops , Pike Lake Trail will be upgraded, and an internal street system will be designed to accommodate the traffic on this site . 2 . Community buildings on this site. 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00-084 cc. doc Page 4 The letter contends the City is interested in the Vierling property for use as a high school site, a library/resource center and a fire station . The School District has identified a location for the new high school in Savage . The City of Prior Lake completed construction of the new library in the downtown area in 1999 . Finally, the City is planning a fire station on the north side of Prior Lake in the future . All sites considered for the station have been on the south side of CSAH 42 . 3 . No Population Growth . The letter states there is no need for additional housing in Prior Lake . The population of Prior Lake has increased approximately 40 % since 1990 . In 2000, the City issued a record number of building permits for new dwelling units (276) . An inventory of vacant lots indicates the City has about 1 .2 years supply available for building . Finally, studies by the Metropolitan Council have indicated there is a need for additional housing in the metropolitan area, including Scott County and Prior Lake . 4 . Orderly Development. The letter states the Vierlings need time to develop an orderly plan for the development of their property. The existing Comprehensive Plan provides them with that time, as well as with an idea of the future uses of the site . The Vierlings can continue to farm until they sell their property or choose to develop the property themselves . The timing concerns for development of this property are totally with the control of the Vierlings . Environmental Reasons 1 . The City ' s Mission to Protect the Natural Environment. The City is committed to protecting the natural environment ; however, this commitment does not preclude development . The City protects the environment through regulations such as wetland preservation, tree preservation, appropriate drainage and surface water management, open space requirements and other ordinance requirements . The City is actually able to exercise more environmental control when the property is developed under the Subdivision Ordinance rather than when it is maintained as agricultural land. The Comprehensive Plan also seeks to maintain a variety of residential densities . This is done on a citywide basis , not parcel by parcel . The designation of this site as High Density Residential and Commercial Business Office Park seeks to balance the density overall . 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00-084 cc .doc Page 5 The Minneapolis Star Tribune article cited by the letter also notes that all of the development that has occurred in the State of Minnesota since 1982 has decreased land classified as rural by only 1 . 1 percent . The article quotes University of Minnesota geographer Fraser Hart, who states, "Most lost farmland was in marginal agricultural counties with soils of low inherent fertility and topography unsuited to modern farm machinery. " 2 . The City ' s Mission to Preserve Open Space. The letter states the Comprehensive Plan states that "major open space should be planned and provided" and that "preservation and treatment of open space shall be a major consideration in planning and review of all types of development . " The letter is incorrect in stating that current land use designations of this property would not allow the provision of open space . Open space is maintained through the Subdivision Ordinance process as well as the fact that the City Comprehensive Plan has identified several locations for neighborhood and community parks . In addition, the City Zoning and Subdivision regulations include required open space provisions for development and parkland dedication requirements . In a letter to neighbors, dated January 8 , 2001 , Kelly & Fawcett also state that enrollment in the Agricultural Preserve Program is for a period of 8 years . This is not entirely correct . Minnesota Statutes § 473H . 08 states the duration of the Agricultural Preserve continues until either the landowner or the City initiates the expiration of the program . Once expiration is initiated, the property remains in the preserve program for 8 years . The City may only initiate expiration if the comprehensive plan is amended so the land is no longer designated for long-term agricultural use . On February 26 , 2001 , the Planning Commission also received the attached petition supporting the applicants ' request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for this property. The current Comprehensive Plan designation of the property does not preclude the use of this land for agricultural purposes . The City has no objection to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides tax protection to existing farmland . The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners . When considering previous requests to amend the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map , the Council determined the supply of land planned for future commercial and office park uses should not be reduced . This 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00-084 cc. doc Page 6 amendment will remove 160 acres from the C -BO designation. Actually, in one recent case the City Council directed a reclassification of other land when commercially guided land was changed to residential . At that point, the Council expressed its interest that there should be no net loss of land for commercial and business office park uses . Conclusion : The Planning Commission forwarded this request to the Council without a recommendation. The staff recommends denial of this request, based on the following rationale : • The Rural Density classification is intended for areas where municipal services such as sewer and water are not currently available and will not be available until at least 2020 . This land does not meet that intent in that sewer and water services are available for this site . In addition, the site has access from two major County roads . • The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to provide for orderly growth of the community. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map identifies future land uses for a two main reasons . First of all, it provides current and future residents with an idea of what types of uses will eventually be developed, and how the City will look in the long term . Second, it allows the City and other providers the opportunity to plan for public services . These services include such things as roads , sanitary sewer, water, storm water and other utilities , parks , schools and other public buildings . • There has not been a material change in the area or conditions affecting this site since these properties were originally designated for R-HD and C -BO in 1995 . The current Comprehensive Plan designations were based, in part, on the fact that the property owner had initiated removal of this property from the Agricultural Preserve program . Maintaining this designation does not preclude the continued agricultural use of the property. The petitioners have presented the following rationale for changing the Comprehensive Plan : • They cannot continue the operation of the farm without the change. As noted earlier in this report, this site is zoned A (Agricultural) . The City has no plans to rezone this property. A rezoning would most likely be initiated by the property owner. The Vierlings can continue to farm until they sell their property or choose to develop the property themselves . The timing concerns for development of this property are totally with the control of the Vierlings . • The tax advantages afforded by the Agricultural Preserve program. According to the Scott County Assessor ' s Office, the 1 : \00files\00compam\00-084\00-084 cc. doc Page 7 difference in taxes for this property under the Agricultural Preserve program as opposed to the Green Acres program is $ 1 . 50 per acre , or a total of $ 480 per year. The Agricultural Preserve program provides protection from the use of eminent domain . The Minnesota Statutes establishing the Agricultural Preserve program do not exempt such properties from eminent domain. The statute does require additional steps before the government may utilize eminent domain proceedings to acquire greater than 10 acres of land . The petitioners ' attorney , in a letter dated January 16 , 2001 , also offered additional rationale for the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Staff' s analysis of those arguments is included on pages 3 - 6 of this report . In short, the staff believes the arguments offered in this letter do not support an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to designate this property as Rural Density . FISCAL IMPACT . Ruduet Impact* There is no direct budget impact involved in this request. ALTERNATIVES : The City Council has two alternatives : 1 . Adopt a Resolution approving the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Rural Density designation as recommended by the Planning Commission. Approval of this amendment requires a 4/5 vote of the City Council . 2 . Adopt a resolution with findings of fact denying the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Rural Density designation . RECOMMENDED MOTION : Alternative #2 . A motion and second to adopt a resolution denying the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. REVIEWED BY . Frank B le , Cil Manager 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00-084 cc. doc Page 8 PR Ion U � �?" NNESOC P RESOLUTION 01 -XX RESOLUTION DENYING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24 , TOWNSHIP 115 , RANGE 22 MOTION BY : SECOND BY : RECITALS WHEREAS , The City of Prior Lake received an application for an amendment to the City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the R- HD ( High Density Residential ) designation and the C- BO ( Business Office Park) designation to the Rural Density designation for the property legally described as follows : The Southwest '/4 of Section 2 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County , Minnesota ; and WHEREAS , legal notice of the public hearing was duly published and mailed in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and Prior Lake City Code ; and WHEREAS , The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 , for those interested in this request to present their views ; and WHEREAS , The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to February 12 , 2001 , to allow consideration of additional information and testimony ; and WHEREAS , The Planning Commission closed the public hearing on February 12 , 2001 ; and WHEREAS , On February 26 , 2001 , the Planning Commission adopted a motion to send this request to the City Council without a recommendation ; and WHEREAS , On March 19 , 2001 , the Prior Lake City Council considered the proposed amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change the designation of the above described property to the Rural Density designation and ; WHEREAS , The City Council received the minutes of the Planning Commission meetings along with the staff reports and other information ; and WHEREAS , the City Council has carefully considered the testimony , staff reports and other pertinent information contained in the record of decision of this case . 1 : \00fi1es\00eompam\00-084\deny res . doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447 -4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER NOW THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE , MINNESOTA, that : 1 . The above recitals are herein fully incorporated herein as set forth above . 2 . The City Council hereby adopts the following findings of fact : (a ) The burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that the Comprehensive Plan designation is in error and that a change is justified . ( b ) The applicants have failed to demonstrate that the current Comprehensive Plan designations of R- HD ( High Density Residential ) and C- BO ( Business Office Park) are inappropriate and that it should be changed . (c) The current Comprehensive Plan designations and zoning of the property do not preclude the continued use of the property for agricultural purposes . (d ) There has not been a material change in the area or conditions affecting the site since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1999 . 3 . The proposed amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to designate the above described property as Rural Density is hereby denied . Passed and adopted this 19th day of March , 2001 . YES NO Mader Mader Ericson Ericson Gundlach Gundlach Petersen Petersen Zieska Zieska (Seal} Frank Boyles , City Manager City of Prior Lake 1 : \00fi1es\00compam\00-084\deny res. doc Page 2 PR4to �?' NNESO P RESOLUTION 01 -XX RESOLUTION APPROVING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24, TOWNSHIP 115 , RANGE 22 MOTION BY : SECOND BY : RECITALS WHEREAS , The City of Prior Lake received an application for an amendment to the City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the R- HD ( High Density Residential ) designation and the C- BO ( Business Office Park) designation to the Rural Density designation for the property legally described as follows : The Southwest '/4 of Section 2 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County , Minnesota ; and WHEREAS , legal notice of the public hearing was duly published and mailed in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and Prior Lake City Code ; and WHEREAS , The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 , for those interested in this request to present their views ; and WHEREAS , The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to February 12 , 2001 , to allow consideration of additional information and testimony ; and WHEREAS , The Planning Commission closed the public hearing on February 12 , 2001 ; and WHEREAS , On February 26 , 2001 , the Planning Commission adopted a motion to send this request to the City Council without a recommendation ; and WHEREAS , On March 19 , 2001 , the Prior Lake City Council considered the proposed amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change the designation of the above described property to the Rural Density designation and ; WHEREAS , The City Council received the minutes of the Planning Commission meetings along with the staff reports and other information ; and WHEREAS , the City Council has carefully considered the testimony , staff reports and other pertinent information contained in the record of decision of this case . NOW THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE , MINNESOTA, that : 1 : \00files\00compam\00-084\approve res . doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . ( 952) 447 -4230 / Fax (952) 447 -4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 1 . The above recitals are herein fully incorporated herein as set forth above . 2 . The proposed amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to designate the above described property as Rural Density is hereby approved . 3 . Approval of this amendment is subject to the approval of the Metropolitan Council . Passed and adopted this 19`h day of March , 2001 . YES NO Mader Mader Ericson Ericson Gundlach Gundlach Petersen Petersen Zieska Zieska { Seal } Frank Boyles , City Manager City of Prior Lake l :\00files\00compam\00-084\approve res . doc Page 2 Location Map s ' ."w 9 p C Location of Property;' Ile 9 14 r � � Nt tee ImMi ` 2 ",.c"' s . �. ,. Ir PL3 L4fl Mal 7 ; € ti WIT ArILAFICI N 1000 0 1000 Feet 1 ./ 16 / 01 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 C . Case File #00-084 The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in Sections 23 and 24, Township 115, Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density. Vonhof stated the Commissioners just received information submitted by the applicant and will not have time to review. However, testimony would be taken by the public and most likely the hearing will continue to the next meeting . Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated January 16 , 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planning Department . Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling have filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C -BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land . This property is presently zoned A (Agricultural) . The east 160 acres of the site are designated as C -BO (Business Office Park) on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map , and the west 160 acres of the site is designated as R-HD (High Density Residential) . The applicants have requested these designations be changed to Rural Density. The total site consists of approximately 320 acres and has been cropland for several years , although some portions of the site are wooded. The property is used for agricultural purposes . There is a farmstead and outbuildings located in the southwest corner of the site . Also , the site is subject to the provisions of the State Wetland Conservation Act. In 2000 , the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program . The City refused this request on the basis the property no longer qualified for program participation. The City has no objection to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax protection for existing farmland . The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners . The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term agriculture has been in place since 1995 . The applicants have not demonstrated any need to change this designation . Staff recommended denial of the request . Comments from the public . Attorney Patrick Kelly, Kelly & Fawcett Law Firm, 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza, St. Paul , representing the applicants , stated the property does not qualify for the Agriculture Preserve Program is because of the Comprehensive Plan . Kelly said land under the R-HD zoning equates to 30 units per acre . Kelly believes his calculations would be 4, 000 to 5 , 000 units with the 160 acre parcel . This is not part of the MUSA . They studied the area dealing with L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO11601 .doc 6 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 well system issues . When and if the Vierlings decide to rezone, the City ' s infrastructure would be impacted . The Vierlings have been farming this property for 150 years . As part of the operation the Vierlings utilize approximately 170 acres on County Roads 42 and 21 . They also have 55 acres on Prior Lake . If the operation is shut down they will have no choice but to develop . Stamson pointed out the City is not asking for the amendment, the Vierlings are . Kelly felt by amending the Comprehensive Plan the City has knocked out the farming process . If they are out of the Ag Preserve they will be piece-mealing the development. Sections of 20 or 30 acres will become office park or commercial . This is a contradiction in reality, normally developers come in and want to put 4, 000 or 5 , 000 units or 3 story office buildings . The Vierlings are asking the City to put them back in the Ag Preserve and farm . It is an 8 year period. With the Ag Preserve Plan they will maintain farming . It is a benefit of open space for the community . Their farming is a profitable operation. Stamson pointed out the Vierlings initiated the 240 acres removal out of the Ag Preserve two years prior to the City changing the Comprehensive Plan . Kelly said at that time , Helen Vierling ' s husband Leo was running the farm and there were other issues going on in the City of Prior Lake . Leo chose not to re- enroll but he figured he had this 8 year window to take a look at it and see what was going on with development. Leo passed away in 1995 and his wish was to continue farming with his son, Michael . Michael has been successful and this is the direction the family would like to go . Most cities are striving for open space and the Vierlings are trying to accomplish that. Stamson referenced the staff report suggesting the alternative of Green Acres . Kelly said it does not do what the Ag Preserve does . Kelly then summarized the Ag Preserve definition . (473H . 01 Minnesota Statutes) . Stamson clarified the benefits of the Ag Preserve : • Better tax advantages • Protected from eminent domain • Special Assessments • Zoning Conflicts Stamson asked Kelly what Ag Preserve does not do . Kelly responded it involves a tax-type situation where it allows deferring assessments as soon as the farming operation ends . With Ag Preserve, the cities can act different ways through the power of zoning . If the farmer is in the Ag Preserve he does not have to worry about the headaches of conflict with the best intentions of the city . Green Acres does not protect like the Ag Preserve . Kelly went on to say there has been correspondence back and forth with the City of Prior Lake since February of 1999 . Atwood questioned if the remaining 110 acres are part of the Ag Preserve . Kelly responded it was part of the operation of the farm, but there is a drainage problem with the lake property. It is zoned office/commercial on the corner of County Roads 41 and 21 . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 7 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 Lemke questioned what governmental body approves the Ag Preserve . Kelly responded once the City okays it, it is reviewed by the County and ultimately approved by the Met Council . McDermott clarified there is trunk sewer and water along County Road 42 and this area . When the County Road 42 and Pike Lake construction started a few years ago , there were crossings put in to the north side of County Road 42 . She stated she would be happy to provide Mr . Kelly with the plans . Stamson asked if there were any other designations besides Rural Residential that would allow Ag Preserve . Kansier answered there was not . Comments from the public : Mike Vierling, 13985 Pike Lake Trail , thanked his neighbors for the support . Vierling said people ask him why he just doesn ' t pack up his bags and go somewhere else . Sometimes money does not buy happiness . He does not want to farm anywhere else . It wouldn ' t be the same . Vierling explained some of the problems he will have if he is not in the Ag Preserve . He would like to see his sons have the opportunity to farm just like his Dad gave him. The neighbors love the open spaces . He knows he will eventually be forced out. Pretty soon there is going to houses everywhere . He wants to run the farm like a business . He can ' t do that unless he is in the Ag Preserve program and asks for the City ' s support . What is 8 years down the line? Even if he wanted to sell it would take years get it right. Stamson questioned Vierling if 8 years is a long enough period to justify the improvements he would like to make . Is it enough? Vierling said it was and went on to say he does not want to put in any improvements until he knows what is going on . Lucy Vierling Cunningham, stated the family has been farming for many years and are dedicated to the farm . This is not the time to sell . She has a family, works full time and still works on the farm . Dan Klamm, 4130 140th Street NE , has known the Vierlings for 15 years and felt it was great to see the farm exist for 150 years . Eight years is not long . Maybe the City has had disagreements with the Vierlings but the community should come together on this issue . Paul Lindahl, 2560 Muhlenhardt Road, felt the farm is a beautiful setting . The Vierlings are asking for help . It is hard for a farmer to ask for assistance . It seems like such a minor thing, at least give them a chance . They have done a lot for the community. Russ Dunker, 4487 Chestnut Lane , said he does not know the Vierlings well but sees Mike a few times a year. Mike has a real passion for what he does . Dunker felt it was not unreasonable for the Vierlings to want the tax advantages . He is in support of the Vierlings farming for as long as they want. They are very good neighbors . Rita Baden, 13866 Pike Lake Trail , questioned how farm land is taken out of rural density when it is being farmed. Why does the community feel they can make these changes ? If the Vierlings are willing to farm, let them make the choice . We are losing our open space . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 8 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 Kansier explained the zoning is still agriculture and farming is a permitted use . The Vierlings can continue to farm as long as they like . The Comprehensive Plan is a long term plan to identify potential uses of property to allow the City, County and the rest of the community to plan for things like municipal services , road systems , the park systems , including the farm land . The City has no intention of stopping the Vierlings from farming . The City is required to plan long term . The zoning has not changed and the City is not requesting the amendment. Kansier clarified the 8 years in Ag Preserve . Once the property is in the Ag Preserve Program it does not come out until requested by the property owner. Once they make the request the 8 year time frame starts . It is not just 8 years , it will go on until the law changes . Kevin Shadduck, 4841 Beach Street, said the Vierlings have been great neighbors . The only reason not to help the Vierlings farm is to perceive that the City wants to force them to sell so the City can get a bigger tax base . It is a terrible motivation not to help a farmer. Joe Zieska, 5316 Hampton, said he has looked out his window the last 14 years to see the Vierling property and if they desire to farm for the next 100 or 200 years they can . But that is not the issue . The property is zoned agriculture . He doesn ' t believe in the history of Prior Lake (inaudible) . To paraphrase Mr. Kelly we have to look at this logically from the facts . First I would like to straighten out a few facts from Mr. Kelly. He stated the property was zoned RHD (Rural High Density) — it is not . It is zoned Agriculture . The Comprehensive Plan is RHD and CBO . He mentioned building 4 , 500 housing units on the land . The City only has 3 ,000 houses . I don ' t see how he can put 4 , 500 in that little spot. He talks about putting manufacturing and industrial in CBO . Those uses are not allowed . It has to be business office park. Kelly speculated on the needed infrastructure and traffic on County Road 42 . He talks about the breakdown of County Road 42 in Burnsville . There isn ' t anyone here that would tell us that 42 in Burnsville is broke down . That is why we need long range planning . The City has to look at what the plan could possibly be used for in the future . As the City Engineer pointed out, they oversized and put trunk sewer and water mains in to get across County Road 42 to get to Pike Lake trail projects in anticipation of future developments . It is only right for the homeowners who live adjacent to this property. Anyone who has been on the Planning Commission for any length of time finds when there is difficult rezoning problems , it is not from the land owner, it is from the adjacent property owners . When I bought my house I never knew what was going to be there . The property owners along County Roads 42 and 18 , Pike Lake Trail will sell some day or somebody else moves in and sees the beautiful farm and all of a sudden an office building goes up they ' ll say "What happened? There was a farm before . " By leaving it in the Comprehensive Plan as potential uses somewhere in the future those people who purchase that property will know potentially what can go in there . These are the reasons the Comprehensive Plan should be left as is . It has nothing to do with present day land use . Dave Baden, said the Vierlings are hard workers . The cows are good neighbors too . The open space in Prior Lake is disappearing, we need less development. He hopes the Vierlings will be farming for another 80 years, not just 8 . Linda Lehman, 13231 Henning Circle , said she has been working with the Vierlings for the past 5 years on the environmental compliance for their feedlots . Mike Vierling is looking at spending $ 35 , 000 to $ 65 , 000 to come into compliance with the feedlot . He needs to know if L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn011601 .doc 9 Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2001 he will be able to farm there for the next 8 to 10 years for that issue alone . Would like the Commissioners to allow him to continue not only for the cost issue but also for compliance and whatever protection he needs from the Ag Preserve . Yvonne Anderson, 13220 Pike Lake , Program Manager for the YMCA Camp and caretaker since 1982 said the Camp has been on Pike Lake since the 1960 ' s . At some time the YMCA Camp will be put into a situation of the potential land use . The 80 acres they are on allows 2 , 500 youth each summer to come and experience the outdoors . Anderson supported the Vierlings and asked the Commission to remember the green space . Cindy Stark, 14730 Rosewood Road, enjoys looking over the Vierling property and Prior Lake . The Vierling farm gives their children the opportunity to see a hard working farm . Greg Engabos , 4931 Beach Street, appreciates what the City has done in developing the Comprehensive Plan and understands proper planning . If it is the intent of the City of Prior Lake to let the Vierlings continue farming, it should be demonstrated they could be put in the best economic situation possible by allowing the Agricultural designation . Both intentions would be met . Jadin Bragg, Carriage Hills Development, said he listened to the Commissioners earlier determining if there was hardship for a deck. He said it seems ridiculous the Commissioners are pointing out they cannot change the Comprehensive Plan to let the Vierlings have what they need. It is causing them economic hardship . Think about the area you live in . Residents want to drive by a farm not high rise buildings . Bragg said he loves the fact he can see Jeffers Pond and the cows . Don ' t change it. Kenny Landherr, 14612 Rosewood Road, said from his family perspective they feel fortunate to live next to the Vierling property and was the main reason they moved there . The bigger issue is that it is a wonderful opportunity for his children to experience the farm . K. R. Radin, 14211 Shore Lane , enjoys seeing the cows and felt Mike Vierling should have the opportunity to continue farming . The hearing was closed to the public . Commissioner Vonhof stated that since the Commissioners received a large packet of material just before the meeting, they would like to continue the public hearing and give the Commissioners time to review the information. MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY CRIEGO , TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO JANUARY 29 , 2001 . Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . Stamson asked for a detailed definition of Green Acres and Ag Preserve specifically the tax details for the next packet. A recess was called at 8 : 12 p . m . The meeting reconvened at 8 : 19 p . m . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO11601 .doc 10 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12 , 2001 L Call to Order . Acting Chair Stamson called the February 12 , 2001 , Planning Commission meeting to order at 6 : 30 p . m . Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Criego , Lemke and Stamson, Planning Director Don Rye, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, City Engineer Sue McDermott, Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson . 2 . Roll Call : Atwood Absent * Criego Present Lemke Present Stamson Present Vonhof Absent 3 . Approval of Minutes : The Minutes from the January 16 , 2001 , Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented . * Commissioner Atwood arrived at 6 : 32 p .m . Commissioner Stamson read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting . 4. Public Hearings . A. Case File #00-084 (Continued) The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in Sections 23 and 24, Township 115 , Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated February 12 , 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planner. Helen, Edward, Michael and Rebecca Vierling filed an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located on the north side of CSAR 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAR 18 . The proposal is to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) and the C -BO (Business Office Park) designations to the Rural Density designation on 320 acres of land . LAO lfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn02120Ldoc 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 . At that meeting, the applicants ' representatives distributed a packet of information. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing in order to review this information . The public hearing was closed at that time . The January 15 , 2001 , letter submitted by the firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. , representatives of the applicants , contained several reasons they believe the Comprehensive Plan should be amended. Kansier categorically contested each item listed in their letter . In 2000, the property owners requested the City approve a request for this property to be reenrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program . The City refused this request on the basis the property no longer qualified for program participation because it failed to meet the statutory requirements . The current Comprehensive Plan designation of the property does not preclude the use of this land for agricultural purposes . The City has no objection to enrollment of this property in the Green Acres program, which provides some tax protection for existing farmland. The City also has no plans to rezone this property from its current A (Agricultural) district unless requested to do so by the property owners . The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency submitted a letter dated February 1 , 2001 indicating a long history with the applicant on water quality runoff issues . The current designation of this property for use as something other than long-term agriculture has been in place since 1995 . The applicants have not demonstrated any need to change this designation. Staff recommended denial of the request . Questions from the Commissioners : Criego : • Questioned why only 240 acres out of the 320 acres are being asked to change . Kansier said the request includes all 320 acres . The 240 acres are what the Vierlings initiated for removal . • Why would the remaining acreage have to be requested? Kansier responded it was still in the Ag Preserve Program . But it no longer meets the statutory requirements . The City has taken no steps to initiate removal of that property . • If the City would take action it would probably take 8 years ? Kansier said it was her understanding the City would have to adopt a resolution stating initiation of removal and it would take 8 years before it actually came out . • Questioned the tax issues and the City ' s ability to take over property as well as enforce ordinances in the area. Kansier explained the public projects relating to the Ag Preserve Ordinance. • Criego and Stamson recapped the definition. • Questioned State regulations from the PCA. L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 2 Planning Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 Comments from the Public : Jim Sullivan, Enforcement Project Leader for the Southeast District of the State, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, MPCA, 520 Lafayette Road, St . Paul, MN 55155 , stated the environmental issues came up in 1996 when the MPCA was first made aware of the discharge issue . The Agency and Vierlings have made some effort to address some of the issues . Sullivan said he did not want to make excuses as to why the issue has not been resolved, but there has been administrative process related to enforcement issues . They are downsizing government and the Agency has been reorganized . MPCA is looking for assurance that the discharge from the facility does not exceed State Water Quality Standards . The other option is a no discharge facility under the Federal Rules . The agency is currently negotiating with the farm to address the issues and set a corrective action plan within the next month . Criego asked if the property was in the Ag Preserve Program would the MPCA have the same rights to impose . Sullivan responded it had no impact on their ability to regulate . The Ag Program is not a program they administer . He went on to say on the Federal level , that there are a number of grant program to help farmers . Sullivan said he is not aware of the affects of the City ' s Comprehensive Plan; the District Conservationists for the NRCS could answer that better . Criego questioned if the land was in Ag Preserve, would the regulations referred to still apply . Sullivan said "Absolutely, the MPCA regulations still stand" . Being in the Ag Program may not help with the funding . Commissioner Stamson re- opened the public hearing . Comments from the Public : Attorney Patrick Kelly of Kelly & Fawcett Law Firm in St . Paul, representing the Vierlings, said the key issue is that the City Planners are representing no plans of rezoning . The Vierlings are asking for purposes of the farm operation to allow them to go into the Ag Preserve . The Vierlings want to continue farming and have no plans to rezone . It is important to allow the farming operation to continue . They have an 8 year plan and the Ag Preserve allows farming without intrusion from local regulations . Michael Vierling, 13985 Pike Lake Trail, said his farm produces soybeans and milk . In 1976 the State of Minnesota certified the Vierling farm as a century farm . There are State programs to protect the land from 10 to 30 years . Vierling said he did not want to put money into the operation and two years later have the City come and take his land . He has to improve the feedlot . At the last meeting the neighbors said they wanted the Vierlings to farm . The Constitution said there should be freedom . Vierling felt it was not fair he should lose out on all the programs just because he lives in Prior Lake . The City is saying it is ready to develop . He would like to continue farming at least 10 years until he knows what his kids want to do . If he continues farming for 10 years , the 2020 Plan will still be 10 years away . That is why his Dad took the land out of Ag Preserve because L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO21201 .doc 3 Planning Commission Meeting Februmy 12, 2001 you don ' t know what the future is going to be . Vierling quoted the Prior Lake American quoted the City, Mayor Wes Mader and a neighbor. He said he felt if the City doesn ' t let his family farm with his kids , you might as well get a machine gun and blow everyone away. Gary Matson, 4584 Hummingbird Trail, lived in Prior Lake two years, said everyone is taken away by the beauty of the Vierling farm . He hopes that carries some weight . Dan Klamm , 4130 140th Street, said his family fought for this Country, it bothers him to see how this piece of America and history is going down . It bothers him that the Ag Preserve gives the City the power to stop whatever makes the Vierling farm go . Klamm told the Commissioners to give it to the Vierlings, turn the cheek and help them farm . People move to Prior Lake for recreation, quality of life, quality people, a good time and a community that cares for one another. Kimbel R. Raden, 14211 Shore Lane, does not know what Council members like or dislike the farms . People who like the farm probably had relatives on the farm and probably had to actually go out and work for a days living . The people who don ' t like farms would rather slip a gas station here or there or on somebody else . They ' re not really telling anybody what is going on because they know how to make a little more money for the City. He stated he understands making money for the City. One of the reasons he moved to the City is because of Mike and Becky ' s farm . Radin is from a farm background and military background and comes from a hardworking family . He totally respects anyone who goes out and works day in and day out. When it is up to a group of people to decide for a man or woman for their kids ' fate not to be able to carry on what they want to do . He felt every citizen in Prior Lake should know who hates the open spaces and farms . Then we know who we ' re up against . It is good for everybody. Raden felt the Commissioners should side with the farm. The public hearing was closed . Comments from the Commissioners . Criego : • It is hard to fight the issue of having or not having a farm . I would love to see the farm another 300 years . It is not the issue . I would love to have open land all around. Prior Lake is growing . How do we grow sensibly without causing hardship for individuals? Prior Lake is a small community and limited for growth. • The question is , do we want to grow the City any larger than it is now? The 2020 Comprehensive Plan does say that we need to grow and we will grow based on various input from the citizens of Prior Lake . There have been many meetings on the Comprehensive Plan and they address all these issues before us tonight. Do we all agree? Obviously not. • Would I like to have many more farms ? Absolutely . • Is it possible long term? Probably not. LAO Ifiles\OIplan eomm\Olpcminutes\mn02120Ldoc 4 Planning Commission Meeting February /2, 2001 • I would love to slow the process . The one thing that comes back to me . Not against the Ag Preserve Program if it has benefits for the Vierling family. • Concern is that once it goes back to Ag Preserve . It could stay that way for another 150 years to 300 years . Is that really what the citizens of Prior Lake want? • This is an emotional issue . • Not clear after all the testimony from Mr . Kelly and the City what the true benefit of the Ag Preserve Program other than it leaves control within the family. Which we all know in 1993 the family decided to pull out of the Ag Preserve . It was not the City nor the citizens decision, it was the Vierling ' s decision . • I believe there was a logical reason Mr. Vierling did that. We do not know what Mr. Vierling saw . • If I could get a guaranty of 8 to 10 years , I would be more than happy to agree . But the fact is once it goes back to preserve it could be locked up forever. Stamson : • Don ' t come up and point your finger and say you are going to force them off the farm after you just moved in to a new house on somebody else ' s farm . People have to realize the decisions made affect somebody. It is not the City who is the bad guy here, the City is responding to what is going on in the community . • Prior Lake is a growing community and we have these issues before us . The City is responding not initiating this issue . • Agreed with Criego , the farm is an asset to the community. The issue is not that the City wants the farm . • The Comprehensive Plan is long term. The realty is this community will not be rural in 2020 , regardless of the actions taken today. What the City is saying is if the Vierlings decide to sell, and someone decides to develop , the City would like the land use to be Business Office Park and high density. The decision to sell is entirely up to Mr. Vierling . • There has to be some type of plan that drives the City in the future to say here is what we want the City to look like, so it is an efficient and an attractive City at the time it is built . Otherwise it will end up haphazard like cities out east that develop without this type of planning . • I downloaded information from the State and read through Agriculture Preserve which repeats over and over again, is long-term farm uses . Their idea of long term is 8 years to get it out. Their idea of long term is a minimum of 8 . • Mr . Vierling stated he would like to farm 8 to 10 years . He will not be forced out . The marketing conditions in this area are not going to force him off in that amount of time . The surrounding cities and suburbs will more likely attract developers before Prior Lake . It is not in demand . • The idea of Ag Preserve was not to cut a deal for a few years . The program stresses long-term farming . Even Mr. Vierling stated it is not his intent . He is looking at 10 years . That is not the intention of the Ag Preserve program . • The issue is what the Comp Plan does and what it needs to be . Rural residential was designed for area where there are no services available to allow agriculture L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 5 Planning Commission Meeting Februmy 12, 2001 uses for a longer term, maybe 30 or 40 years . This is not appropriate for this place . • The feeling of the Commissioners and Council five years ago and when the Comprehensive Plan was recently update the idea was this area will develop 15 to 20 years out . • The uses are appropriate . Cannot support changes . Lemke , • Agreed with the comments from the Commissioners . It is an emotional issue . • What we are talking about is not what the land is going to be used for tomorrow . It is zoned Agriculture, tomorrow it will be agriculture . We are talking about somewhere in the future . If the land is developed what will it look like . • I wouldn ' t be truthful or honest to say 20 or 30 years down the road that it will still be agriculture . • Anyone else moving out here has the right to look at a Comprehensive Plan and know what the future of that land will look like . • Mr. Vierling and his attorney, Mr. Kelly stated the land would be developed some day. • Will not support changing the existing designation of the Comprehensive Plan . Atwood , • Couldn ' t agree more on an emotionally charged issue . • Is rural density appropriate? Kansier explained the designation and the services . • If the Comprehensive Plan is amended, what is the process and the cost for the City? Kansier explained the process — two ways it could be amended again. The City would do an update of the plan. The costs are staff time, publications , public hearing notices and hearing costs . The other option would be for the property owner to file an amendment, the process is the same — go before the Planning Commission and then the final decision is made by the City Council . The filing fees generally do not cover the full cost of the process . The cost if initiated by the City is paid by the taxpayers . • Time frame ? Kansier said it could take 45 to 90 days depending on meeting schedules . • The Metropolitan Council needs to approve all Comp Plan Amendments . • The Planning Commission is an advisory committee who makes a recommendation to the City Council . • What does it look like to the citizens of Prior Lake if the Comp Plan is amended? Kansier explained it gives residents and others who move here an idea of what the plan will be through the year 2020 . The document can be changed. • Nobody will come in and take the Vierling farm a minute after 2020 . Some people see this as a threat of taking the farm . • See no reason not to let them apply for the Ag Preserve program . • There are two sides to everything . Does not see a burden on the City to change the Comp Plan. • Would like to see the Vierlings step up to the plate and pay the costs . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doe 6 Planning Commission Meeting Februmy 12, 2001 • If this does not pass, the Commission does not make the final decision; no one is trying to take away the beautiful farm . Criego : • Missing something, a month ago , the taxes were one of the big issues . The Vierlings claimed it was a tax problem if it was not in Ag Preserve . That is not so . • Two things are coming across . One is the fear the City is going to do something that would inhibit you from farming . The second concern is putting up any accessory structures because of requests the City might require . • The MPCA says they are trying to help the Vierlings to not pollute the water and there is some funding available to help . The only thing I can put my finger on is fear of the City taking over some of the property . • Mike Vierling said, "Just look at what the City did to the Mendens and Kops . Look what they had to do to fight . The Kops lost their farm . I ' m the only one left . The Jeffers farm is going to be developed . The City took their farms away . The City is always looking for parks , fire stations , whatever. Why should I put in thousands of dollars into that feedlot and like the MPCA said if I don ' t get into the Ag Preserve Program I won ' t get no funding . Why should I put all the money in? What is the difference in the Zoning? The City can take it out tomorrow . " • Kansier responded the City could not take it out unless the Comprehensive Plan was amended . • Why would the City amend it now then turn around and amend it again? It doesn ' t make sense . • Vierling asked if the City could guarantee 10 years ? • The concern is what could happen is that the kids and their kids want to continue farming and more power to them . At least in the Comprehensive Plan • We as citizens have seen what happens when a City tries to take over land . There is a huge outcry and there should be . There is no intent of takeover of the farm. It is up to the Vierlings if they want to develop the property . • Vierling questioned what would happen if he guaranteed he would take it out in 10 years . • Kansier pointed out Mr . Vierling ' s intentions are good but probably not legal . It would be provisional contract zoning which is illegal in the State . The City would have to talk to the City Attorney . • Mr. Kelly said he was a City Attorney for a number of cities in the metropolitan area and stated agreements could be made in unique situations like this and amend the Comprehensive Plan at any time . The City is under the obligation under the 2020 plan to re-look at the Comprehensive Plan. Kelly said the Vierlings could give the City a guarantee in 10 years they are going to be out farming . They want the 10 years to allow the farming use based on their land use experts and engineers . The Ag Preserve gives the Vierlings all the things they want to do . • Do we (Commissioners) need legal advice on the 10 year agreement? Kansier said they would. • Can the Commissioners pass a recommendation to City Council with certain conditions and let City Council and the legal staff decide if it is appropriate? L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 7 Planning Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 Kansier said there is nothing stopping the Commission from making a recommendation. Stamson : • Opposed to that approach, it is bad government . This is a long term planning document . The idea for government is to treat the community as a whole and look out for the entire community ' s best interest. The drive is to direct development further out. This would happen all over the City if that if that is agreed to . • Agree it is a tough decision. Criego : • The Comp Plan is known for a long range plan, do not see any problem modifying the plan . Stamson : • It should be modified on situations that are changing to alter the long term plans . We can ' t make long term plans reflect short term goals . That is not the way to do it . Atwood : • Questioned Criego why 10 years makes him feel better? Criego responded if there is no time limit it can be farmed for the next 300 years . That is detrimental to the City of Prior Lake . To have the City give up that right at this point is not a proper judgment . The proper judgment would be to give the citizens and the Vierlings what they need. And if that is 10 years more power to them. That doesn ' t mean they have to stop farming, it just comes out of the Ag Preserve . • Questioned Criego why he felt if the Vierlings farmed another 10 years it would be detrimental to Prior Lake . Criego felt in the Ag Preserve program it is . The Green Acre program is fine . At some point a developer will pay an enormous price to develop that land . If it is in the Ag Preserve it will take 8 years to get out of the program . By that time the developer will be long gone and find another piece of property. If it ' s not in the Ag Preserve, the Vierlings can sell the property at that point and take advantage of the offer. • Questioned Criego why he (the City) would be making that decision for the Vierlings . Criego responded the Vierlings took the land out of the Ag Preserve in 1993 , it was not the City. • The City based their 1995 Comprehensive Plan on the Vierlings taking the land out of the Ag Preserve . It was done that way because of the Vierlings . • Criego felt 10 years was a good compromise . The Comprehensive Plan is a 20 year document . • The Vierlings should be able to decide . Does not have a problem with the Vierlings staying in Ag Preserve. • Criego responded that the Comprehensive Plan which was discussed with the citizens of Prior Lake, the Planning Commission and City Council and because of the actions of the Vierlings they decided to make the land something different L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doe 8 Planning Commission Heeling Februag 12, 2001 from farming . Now because of financial considerations and a fear of the government, the Vierlings would like the Ag Program to be re-instituted for a period of time . I can accept that, but not forever . They can still farm forever; no one says they can ' t, just not under the Ag Preserve program . Stamson : • The bottom line is there is no financial impact. The real concern is that the City is going to initiate something that will cease the existence of the farm, which may or may not happen. • Criego felt the Commission is a buffer between the citizens of Prior Lake and the government . The City may or may not cease the operation. The chances of stopping the operation are minute . Understand Vierlings ' fear. • This document has been worked on for a long time and under the scrutiny of the Met Council and now we ' re talking about changing . We should not base the amendment on one family ' s fear of what is not going to happen . This is not the way to run a government . It is not good for the balance of the citizens of Prior Lake . Kansier explained the Comprehensive Plan and all approvals from the Met Council . Atwood . • Does not want to be part of a Commission that anyone can stand up and put a Superamerica in my next door lot . That ' s not what we ' re doing here . • There is tons of sentiment in this community and this property is a landmark, for those reasons we should extend a hand for some peace of mind, whether or not we agree with it . Their fears are real . Why tie their (the Vierlings) hands behind their back . Stamson : • There is no concrete actionable thing the City is doing to stop the farming operation. The fear something might happen is a less valid reason to re-write the ordinance . • This is a primary piece of real estate . It is on the corner to two major roads in a developing community . Is the best use of that land rural residential? It is not what Mr. Vierling wants to do with is property, that ' s up to him . From the City ' s point of view, is rural residential the best use for that property? It is not, long term . • If Mr. Vierling wants to stay in the farm, that ' s up to him . What the Comprehensive Plan does is set an instance if he decides to quit farming what is going to happen to it? • We are discussing a planning document and what the purpose is . Atwood : • Agreed . But felt there are certain circumstances that dictate certain allowances and this one of the instances . • Believes the average citizen in Prior Lake would agree . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO21201 .doc 9 Planning Commission Meeting February 12, 2001 Lemke : • Questioned Mr. Kelly on eminent domain protection . Kelly read the Met Council ' s interpretation. • Understand under eminent domain the land can be condemned in a one year time frame. • Kelly said that definition is going on the Ag Preserve Program . • Kelly responded the Vierlings are concerned that a government agency will come in and condemn part of the farm. The Ag Preserve will protect them from any government agency and let them continue farming . • The authority ' s right under eminent domain, the 8 years would not be an ironclad guarantee . If an authority came in to condemn this property even though it is in Ag Preserve, the EQB would look at it and say no other alternative exists , they can only delay it for one year if another alternative exist . Kelly said those procedures are on a high standard of taking the farming operation as a priority for the purpose of statute . There are a number of hoops . It ' s not just saying we want this land for "x" purpose . It has to be balanced out . • Kansier noted that procedure applies when acquiring land or easement having an area of 10 acres or more . This procedure is over and above the eminent domain procedure in the Ag Preserve . MOTION BY CRIEGO , SECOND BY ATWOOD , TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF STATUS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH THE CONDITION WITHIN TWO YEARS THE PROCESS TO TAKE IT OUT OF AG PRESERVE IS UNDERTAKEN BY THE OWNER THEREBY ALLOWING IT TO BE OUT OF THE AG PRESERVE WITHIN TEN YEARS . Vote taken indicated ayes by Atwood and Criego , nays by Stamson and Lemke . The motion fails . The deadline for the City to take action is in March. It can go the City Council with no recommendation. MOTION BY LEMKE, SECOND BY STAMSON, TO DENY THE REQUEST . Vote taken indicated ayes by Stamson and Lemke, nays by Atwood and Criego . The Motion fails . MOTION BY CRIEGO , SECOND BY ATWOOD , TO TABLE THE REQUEST TO THE FEBRUARY 26 , 2001 , MEETING . Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . A recess was called at 8 : 00 p . m . The meeting reconvened at 8 : 11 P . M . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn021201 .doc 10 Planning Commission Meeting February 26, 2001 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2001 1 . Call to Order : Chairman Vonhof called the February 26 , 2001 , Planning Commission meeting to order at 6 : 30 p . m . Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Lemke, Stamson and Vonhof, Planning Director Don Rye, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, City Engineer Sue McDermott, Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2 . Roll Call : Atwood Present Criego Absent Lemke Present Stamson Present Vonhof Present 3 . Approval of Minutes : The Minutes from the February 12 , 2001 , Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented . Commissioner Vonhof read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting . The attorney for the first public hearing was not available at the starting time . Therefore, the agenda changed to Item 5A . (see page 9) , followed by Item 4B . (see page 5 ) . 4. Public Hearings : A. Case File #00-084 The Vierling property owners are requesting an amendment to the City of Prior Lake Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan for 320 acres located in Sections 23 and 24, Township 115, Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density. (Continued f coni the February 12, 2001 meeting) L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doc 1 Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated February 26 , 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planner. The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing on January 16 , 2001 . At that meeting, the applicants ' representatives distributed a packet of information. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing in order to review this information . On February 12 , 2001 , the Planning Commission reopened the public hearing to consider this additional information as well as additional testimony . Following the testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and discussed this request . After considerable discussion, the Planning Commission considered a motion to approve this request . This motion failed on a 2-2 vote . The Planning Commission also considered a motion to deny this request. Again, the motion failed on a 2-2 vote . Rather than send this item to the City Council without a recommendation, the Commission tabled action on the request until February 26 , 2001 . No new information has been submitted . Comments from the Commissioners : Lemke : • Have not changed mind since the last meeting . • Would like to see the Vierlings farm the land as long as they want . • Do not feel it is appropriate to say the future use of the land is going to be rural density . Stamson : • There are a number of land use issues . Is long term agricultural appropriate for this piece of property? I do not think it is . It is located within the city limits, served by two major county roads, water and sewer are available to it. The Metropolitan Council has a procedure to identify permanent agricultural land . There are a number of items related to soil quality and tests . 1 ) The land is agriculture, a situation that is rapidly disappearing; 2) Adjacent land is zoned agriculture and; 3 ) the land is outside the future urban area, a designation set by the Metropolitan Council relating to the MUSA and the land use in 2040 . The property meets none of the criteria that the Metropolitan Council deems appropriate for long-term agricultural use . • Talked to people responsible for rural policy at the Metropolitan Council . In their opinion they did not feel this property would meet their standards for review for land that qualifies for Agricultural Preserve status . • Are we saving farmland by protecting this piece of property? Researched a number of different sites . This action does not preserve farmland. The biggest threat to farmland is inefficient use of farmland within municipalities . By stripping off urban areas to development like this , is actually destroying the farming economy by forcing nonagricultural uses into urban areas . • This site has sewer and water available to it and is in a municipality . What we are proposing flies directly in the face of what farm preservationists are advocating . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doc 2 • Why can ' t this farm exist in a sea of residential, commercial uses 30 years from now? Because like any industry farming requires the critical mass to support the infrastructure that it requires to operate efficiently and survive . That infrastructure is not in this area, it is quickly moving south. If we preserve a small pattern of farms here and there in developed areas , we are forcing development to hopscotch . There will be little pockets of developments in between largely farming areas like Lydia and New Prague . That is the problem it creates . • This type of action creates more pressure for farmland and better farmland to disappear. • The applicant spoke of his fear of eminent domain preventing him from investing in his operation . The Agricultural Preserve does not prevent eminent domain procedures but creates a higher standard, which is reviewed by the Metropolitan Council . • Agree it would prevent the City taking the land for parks or some public uses . The City ' s current designation is business office park clearly stating the City has no intention of creating parkland . If the City wanted parkland, it would be designated park. • Ironically, the business office park designation prevents the school district from using its power of eminent domain. They also have that power separate from the City . • The corresponding district next to the business office park designation is C5 and schools are not allowed in the C5 district. • If this is amended to rural residential and the zoning is agriculture, schools are allowed in the agriculture district . Now you have a flat piece of property with no schools and has city sewer and water available . It is an ideal location for a school on that side of the City . It is far more likely to loose the property to the school for eminent domain than the City. Nothing is solved. There is an increase of eminent domain. • The final issue is the proposal from the last meeting for a written agreement with the applicant to rezone . That is a short-term backhanded way of getting the applicant ' s request for Agricultural Preserve approved, but in the long term we are still reverting back to the original business office park. The way it was presented was , the idea behind it was to allow the applicant to apply for grant money that the federal government does not deem him qualified under the current zoning . To me that is no different than misrepresenting income on your taxes or misrepresenting your health on an insurance document. It is fraudulently representing your intentions for a piece of property in order to obtain money from the government that they wouldn ' t give you otherwise . The City should not be a part of that . • Will not support the amendment . Patrick J . Kelly, representative for the Vierlings , said he takes issue with Stamson ' s statement of misrepresentation of doing the Ag Preserve for some fraudulent means . Kelly said that was untrue . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO22601 .doc 3 Stamson said he did not intend to imply that it was the applicant ' s intentions . By doing S05 it would be the City being fraudulent by their actions . Stamson said he had no issue with the applicant and apologized if the applicant felt it was directed at him . Atwood : • Appreciate all the research from Commissioner Stamson. • Has not changed her position from the last meeting . • The Comp Plan is a fluid document . It can be looked at and amended . • This is an exceptional case where we can do that comfortably . • It is the Vierlings property and they should ultimately decide what happens . • This is an advisory commission. City Council will make the final decision . Vonhof: • Appreciate input and obvious reflection the Commissioners spent on this issue . • Worked extensively on the Comprehensive Plan from 1993 to 1995 and its ultimate approval in 1996 . At that time, the City held a number of public hearings . In my 8 years on the Commission there has never been so much interest in a planning issue . The Comprehensive Plan is a guide . It is where we as a community think we are going to be in 2010 and 2020 . This process takes a long time for everyone to have ample opportunity to be heard . It is a good process . • Believes the Comprehensive Plan also is a plan based upon information available at the time decisions are made . There is additional information that was not available in 1995 . This process took almost 2 years . • We have been told by the Vierlings that they intend to farm for some period of time . • The zoning is correct. It is appropriate . • The Comprehensive Plan should also be consistent with what the projected land use is going to be. • A lot of issues brought up have not been directly related to the basic issue . • In planning there is many time spans . A 20-year time span is a relatively long period of time . • In these types of situations , requests for amendments, people are not thinking of what we are actually looking at. We are trying to figure out what that land use is going to be 10 or 20 years down the line . • The property owners have indicated they plan to farm long term . The zoning is consistent . But that was not the Commission ' s understanding back in 1995 . • We have to get back to the basic issue at hand . What is the projected land use 10 or 15 years down the line . And we have been told it is going to be farming — agricultural . • Regardless of what the surrounding land uses are, it is possible to farm completely surrounded by residential property. • Reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and there is an anticipation that it can be modified . The key is — is there additional information? New information has been provided. Regardless of what the neighbors think or what the City thinks or location, the ultimate test in a sense goes back to what the property owner is going LAO Ifiles\OIplancomm\OIpcminutes\=02260Ldoc 4 to do . If everyone in the City would come up and tell us what they were going to do with their property long term then obviously the Plan would be more accurate . The City ' s intent is to have as accurate a projection as we can . • We have someone who has come forward to tell us this is not accurate because it is not consistent with what our plans are . Very clearly that would justify an amendment . • The Comprehensive Plan ' intent is to have an accurate projection. • Fully respect fellow Commissioner ' s viewpoint on this matter. • Having been involved in this Plan from the beginning with a lot of time invested in this document, with the information presented to this Commission, it is consistent to support the amendment . Open discussion : Stamson : • Felt Vonhof misrepresented the idea of the Comprehensive Plan . It is not a document for what property owners intend to use their property for. If it were, there would be a mismash of uses because everyone would have different ideas of what their property should be . • The idea behind the Comp Plan is for a City to lie out what the community should look like so in years to come as it develops , it will be efficient, manageable and avoid the appearance of cities that grew before planning . Cities that are a mismash of industries in the middle of residential neighborhoods . That truly represented what owners ' long term use was . We need an orderly development of the community so it is an attractive livable community. Vonhof: • Gave an analogy of a land use such as a college campus . • We have information that this is what the use is going to be . That ' s the difference in this particular case . • This use will continue . It is reflecting reality. Let ' s make it consistent with the use . Stamson : • The college property and farmland use cannot be compared . • The proposed Rural Residential district does not reflect the correct district use either. It is intended for areas without city water and sewer and residential lots for 40 acres or more . • The implication is residential use, not agricultural use . We don ' t have an agricultural designation for the Comp Plan to reflect what the Vierlings want . Vonhof: • The services in this case were driven by other developments off the Vierling property. • The Comprehensive Plan is a broad brush, the zoning is a more accurate land use . L:\Olfilcs\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doc 5 • When someone enters into the public record that they intend to use the property in this particular way and will continue the existing use, we are just responding to it . The request is a response to that . • Get back and get focused to the planning document and guideline . • As planners we take the best information we have at the time and apply the appropriate land use and designation. It is a pure planning function . Stamson : • That is point, this is planning for future uses . By changing it, we say Rural Residential property . If for some reason Mr. Vierling sells or loses the property, we have it designated as rural residential property . It is not the intent . • Understands Mr. Vierling wants to farm . That is great, but for planning, for some unforeseen circumstances that doesn ' t happen, we need to designate it for what it should be and Rural Residential is not what it should be . Vonhof: • Agreed with Stamson on that point . • Economic conditions can change anything . An economic slowdown could make multiple family housing become far more desirable than single family housing . If that happens , the City would have to make adjustments at the time . • This is the information today. • The plan tells people coming in what the area is going to be . It is totally appropriate if you get new information it can change . • Agreed with Stamson that a two year bandaid is not appropriate . But when someone comes in and says this is what the land is going to be, we should reflect that . It is totally appropriate to change with new information . • Stamson made very compelling arguments regarding the surrounding infrastructure and the location of the land. The overriding sense is that we now have information that is unique in the planning sense . Lemke : • Concern for people moving into the area . They go to the Comprehensive Plan and see • Rural density, then in 10 years when Mr. Vierling sells his property a business office park comes in . Those people will come back and say "why didn ' t you tell me?" Stamson : • When Mr. Vierling decides to sell, what do you think the best land use is ? Vonhof: • A lot of different things . We have to deal with the information we have now . Stamson : L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mnO22601 .doc 6 • The Commission has never used that criteria before . What we have is one landowner ' s stated intention. There are a number of scenarios that can change that . • It should reflect the Community ' s interest as a whole . What this area should be at 2020 build out . • Stamson and Vonhof discussed college land uses . • At 2020 build-out, assuming there will be more development, where that is , we don ' t know . The Comprehensive Plan should reflect where market forces are creating development . And these are the areas that the City thinks these types of uses fit into the community. • Vonhof agreed . • The fact that one particular property owner might have a different intended use does not change the fact that if his property would develop in the next 20 years that this is what the City would like the guiding vision to be . • Agree that Mr . Vierling may still be there, but designating the land agriculture reflects an accurate picture of what the developing community will look like in the future . Vonhof: • We do not know what the future will be . But this Plan does not go beyond 2020 . What we are talking about is amending the existing Plan based on the information provided today . • If I were buying property around there I would want accurate information for the surrounding area. It will significantly impact 20 years . A petition was presented to staff. Atwood : • Can the record reflect Commissioner Criego ' s previous vote? Kansier said the City Council will have all the minutes and testimony that occurred . MOTION BY STAMSON, TO PASS ALONG THIS ITEM TO COUNCIL WITH NO RECOMMENDATION. Motion dies for lack of a second . MOTION BY ATWOOD , SECOND BY VONHOF, TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE VIERLING PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 23 AND 24, TOWNSHIP 11 , RANGE 22 . Vote taken indicated ayes by Atwood and Vonhof, nays by Stamson and Lemke . Motion dies . MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY LEMKE, TO PASS THIS ITEM ALONG TO CITY COUNCIL WITH NO RECOMMENDATION. L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doc 7 Atwood . • Questioned why can ' t the Motion could not go to the City Council as 2 to 2 vote . Stamson : • There should be a record for the City Council . Three Motions have failed . It doesn ' t move along until the Commission moves the recommendation forward . Kansier said this goes before the City Council on March 19 , 2001 . This matter will not be a public hearing . Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . Stamson said the community needs to look at all farm land and take a look at treating it differently. There is no language to protect farm land in the Ordinance . A recess was called at 7 : 21 p . m . The meeting reconvened at 7 : 37 p . m . to item 4C . Be Case Files #01 - 005 & 006 Pavek Family Investments Company/Hodgson Trust is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Plat to be known as Regal Crest to allow a cluster townhouse development consisting of 25 . 58 acres to be subdivided into 78 lots for townhouse units on the property located on the west side of CSAH 21 approximately 1/a mile north of CSAH 82 . (Continued from the February 12, 2001 uzeetiug) Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier stated this meeting was continued from the February 12 , 2001 , meeting to allow the developer time to address a number of issues that the staff felt were outstanding . One of the issues had to do with drainage and the Watershed District requirement . Kansier was told by the applicant today they had met with the Watershed District and they need to make some revisions to their plans . For that purpose the applicant is requesting a continuation to the March 12 , 2001 meeting . MOTION BY ATWOOD , SECOND BY STAMSON, TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO MARCH 12 , 2001 . Vote taken indicated ayes by all . MOTION CARRIED . C . Case File #01 -003 Shamrock Development has submitted an application for a Preliminary Plat known as The Wilds South consisting of 77. 19 acres to be subdivided into141 single family lots . This property is located on the south side of Wilds Parkway and the north side of County Road 82 . Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated February 26 , 2001 , on file in the office of the City Planner . Shamrock Development has applied for a Preliminary Plat for the property located on the north side of CSAH 82 , on the south side of Wilds Parkway and west of Orion Road . L:\Olfiles\Olplancomm\Olpcminutes\mn022601 .doc 8 Kelly & Fawcett , P . A ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 PATRICK J. KELLY SONG LO FAWCETT Of Counsel: JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR. STEPHEN KELLY MCGUIGAN & HOLLY, P.L.C. SIA LO CHAD D. LEMMONS KATHLEEN M. LOUCKS (651 ) 224-3781 ROBERT J. FOWLER Facsimile (651 ) 223-8019 E-Mail : kelfawcett@qwest.net January 8 , 2001 Dear Neighbors : Please be advised that Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. represents the Vierlings who live at 13985 Pike Lake Trail, N. E . and 14310 Pike Lake Trail, N. E . , Prior Lake, Minnesota. As you are aware, the Vierling family has requested the City of Prior Lake Planning Commission to amend its Comprehensive Use Plan to re-enroll their property north of County Road 42 into the Agricultural Preserve Program . Enrollment of the property in the Agricultural Preserve Program would allow it to remain farm land for a period of eight years . After the eight year period, the Vierlings would be required to re- enroll in the program. A public hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled for January 16, 2001 at 6 : 30 p . m. at the Fire Station #1 , located at 16776 Fish Point Road, Prior Lake, Minnesota. On behalf of the Vierling family, I would like to request your support in this matter. Enrollment in the Agricultural Preserve Program is very important to the Vierling family because the property has been in their family for decades and they seek to preserve it as farmland . The Vierlings currently farm the property and wish to continue farming. The Vierling property is one of the few remaining large tracts of land within the Prior Lake city limits . The Vierlings need your support in obtaining this designation for the property . 1T you Have any questions , piease a' 0 not ileSll �I [e to CojIL ,.ct ml U at ih; above xxu fiber. Thnru; wou few your attention and anticipated support . Respectfully yours , KELLY & FAWCETT, P.A. 3V1 6 Ora, wt a, Song Lo Fawcett cc : Mike and Becky Vierling Helen Vierling Edward Vierling r Kelly_ & Fawcett , P . A . s A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W ,IAN 16 2001wit 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET ---- - SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 PATRICK J. KELLY Of Counsel: SONG LO FAWCETT JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR, STEPHEN KELLY MCGUIGAN & HOLLY, P.L.C. SIA LO CHAD D. LEMONS (651 ) 224-3781 KATHLEEN M. LOUCKS Facsimile (651 ) 223-8019 ROBERTJ. FOWLER E- Mail : kelfawcett@gwest.net January 15 , 2001 Members of the Planning Commission City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Southeast Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372 Dear Members of the Planning Commission: The Firm of Kelly & Fawcett , P .A. represents the Vierling Family. As you are aware , the Vierling family has requested you to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan ( " Comp . Plan" ) from the current designations of R-HD (High Density Residential) and C-BO ( Business Office Park) to Rural Residential Density of their parcels . This request by the Vierlings should be granted for a number of historical , environmental and logistical reasons set forth in this letter. Hopefully, the information that we provide you in this letter and the corresponding exhibits will allow you to approve the Comp . Plan amendment as requested by the Vierlings . A. Historical Reasons The Comp . Plan should be amended because of the large amount of history that encompasses the Vierling family farm . The Vierling family farm is over 150 years old and has been a part of Prior Lake since the settlement of the city . The Vierlings have cared for and farmed this land for that 150 years . Since these parcels has been in the family for several generations , it has a great sentimental value to the Vierling family which is why they want to preserve it, so that future generations of Vierlings may take part in their family tradition . The City of Prior Lake must pay special respect to the significance the property holds for the Vierling family as its legacy in Minnesota, Scott County and Prior Lake . The City also has an interest in preserving the Vierling parcels for its own historical reasons . The Vierling farm is one of the oldest "businesses " in the City because it existed before the City ' s incorporation. The City has also expressed that it is interested in preserving history. It its Comp . Plan , the City states that it wishes to " incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum feasible extent. " ( Comp . Plan at 25 , 26 and 42) . The City specifically notes in the Comp . Plan that areas of the Vierling parcels (Prior Lake) are considered to be " the natural resource area of Letter to Planning Commission Page 2 from Patrick J. Kelly and January 15, 2001 Chad D. Lemmons greatest historical significance . " (Comp . Plan at 117) (emphasis added) . Based on its values expressed above in its Comp . Plan and the fact that the Vierling property represents a part of Prior Lake ' s heritage , it should be preserved by the City. i Be Logistical 1 . City is not currently prepared for High Density or Office Parks The proposed zoning of the Vierling parcels represent intensive uses of the property and would best be implemented by an overall plan for orderly development. The real estate taxes which would result from the proposed zoning could force piecemeal development of the Vierling parcels . This is not in the best interests of either the City or the Vierlings . In order to solve this problem, the City should designate the parcels Rural/Residential density. Land is often designated Rural/Residential Density in order to preserve large tracts of land which can eventually accommodate orderly planned urban development. (Comp . Plan at 44) . In addition, the City can create the option of parenthetically indicating other classifications for Rural/Residential Density land . (Comp . Plan at 44) . The alternative categories reflect the City ' s determination that the property would be eventually conducive to some urban, rather than rural use . (Comp . Plan at 44) . In any event , the City will be amending the Comp . Plan after ten years , which will then allow re-evaluation of the property . Since the City does not currently have water service, sewer service, p roper transportation service to the Vierling parcels , this option would be the best option for the City. a. Water Service The City has not prepared the Vierling parcels for development because water mains do not even exist to serve them at this time (Watermain Map) . In fact, the water mains are not a part of the City ' s immediate plan. They are a part of the 20 Year Capital Improvement Plan instead. Without immediate improvements , present well capacity can not support the immediate development of the Vierling parcels because the Department of Natural Resources will not allow any additional withdrawals from the Jordan. Sandstone aquifer and also has concerns about the City utilizing the Mount Simon/Hinckely aquifer. Therefore , the City would have difficulties obtaining water service for the Vierling parcels in the near future which would be required to make it developable . b . Sewer Service At present, the City has no sewer service infrastructure in place to serve the Vierling parcels because they are outside the present MUSA line . (Existing Sanitary Sewer Map ) . The current MUSA line is entirely within the City limits but it does not include all of the land within the City limits , including a majority of the Vierling parcels . ( Comp . Plan at 254) . The Comp . Plan states that development of land within the MUSA will require the extension of municipal sanitary sewer services . ( Comp . Plan at 254) . Land outside the MUSA cannot be connected to Letter to Planning Commission Page 3 from Patrick J. Kelly and January 15, 2001 Chad D. Lemmons the municipal sewer system and must be developed with larger individual lots to accommodate onsite wastewater treatment. (Comp . Plan at 254) . Therefore , because there is no sewer service to the Vierling parcels , the City is not capable of developing the Vierling parcels at this time . c . Traffic Considerations Even if water service and sewer service are not taken under consideration, the Vierling parcels still faces significant problems with traffic if they are deemed High Density Residential and Business or Office Park. County Road 42, the main thoroughfare through the Vierling parcels , is not capable of safely handling the additional traffic that development of the Vierling would generate . Currently County Road 42 is only four-lane from Ferndale Avenue to Highway 13 . (Comp . Plan at 134) . In addition, the City admits in its Comp . Plan that there is a "limited availability of transit service, " which means that personal automobiles are the only means of getting around in the City. (Comp . Plan at 154) . Since the roads surround the Vierling parcels are not able to handle the amount of traffic that High Density Residential and Business Office Park would bring, the City should not develop the land until these changes are made . 2 . The City wishes to build community buildings on the Vierling Parcels If the Vierling parcels are rezoned and developed, the City will lose its chance to build on the property . The City is currently looking to build a new high school , a Library/Resource Center and a Fire Station (Comp . Plan at 37 and 200) . If the parcels are rezoned, the City will not have the time that it needs to plan the construction of these buildings because they will be immediately sold to commercial developers because the real estate taxes from the proposed zoning would force piecemeal development of the property. However, if the City designates the property rural/residential , it would have the opportunity to have some additional time in considering purchasing the parcels for its own use . 3 . No New Housing is Needed at this Time, Population Has Not Grown The City has no need for Residential High Density property at this time . In its Comp . Plan , the City states that its population increase has stabilized since 1990 and its desire for a rate of development may even be lower than private interests would prefer ( Comp . Plan at 271 and 124) . In general , the City states that its housing supply is adequate , it already has a reasonable supply of single family, duplex , and townhouse rentals , a significant amount of affordable and moderate cost housing remains available ( Comp . Plan at 101 and 102) . However, the typical uses of urban high density consist of two -family dwellings , townhouses , apartments , and other designs , including single family manufactured dwellings and single family dwellings by conditional use permit and/or Planned Unit Development. ( Comp . Plan at 49 ) . Based on the language in its Comp . Plan, these types of dwellings are not needed presently by the City . Therefore , the Vierling parcels should be designated residential/rural until this need is more evident . Letter to Planning Commission Page 4 from Patrick J. Kelly and January 15, 2001 Chad D. Lemmons 4 . Orderly Development The Vierlings understand that as Prior Lake continues to develop , farming will become economically unviable . To prepare for this, the Vierlings need time to develop an orderly plan for the development of their property. By granting the amendment (and subsequent Ag Preserve status) , the Vierlings and the City have time to agree on orderly development of the Vierling Property . Denial of this amendment (and Ag Preserve status) increases the pressure on the Vierlings to develop in a haphazard manner resulting in an ill-conceived development. Be Environmental 1 . The City ' s Mission to Protect the Natural Environment The City, in its Mission Statement and in its Comp . Plan, states that it is committed to " environmentally sensitive community development . " (Comp . Plan at 25 and A4 ) . The Mission Statement of the City reads " [t]he City of Prior Lake is committed to serving the common good of its residents by promoting community values , environmentally sensitive community development, robust business growth, financial stability, safety, and diverse recreational opportunities . " (Comp . Plan at A4 ) (emphasis added) . This Mission Statement is included in the Comp . Plan under Objective Number 5 which provides for " conservation and protection of the natural environment. " (Comp . Plan at 32) (emphasis added) . With very little development, forests , small wetlands and plenty of pastureland, the Vierling parcels represent an ideal preservation of the natural environment of the City. By amending its Comp . Plan to zone the Vierling parcels as Rural Residential , the City would be able to fulfill its objectives of preserving the natural environment because the maximum rural density is one dwelling unit per 40 acres . (Comp . Plan at 44) . This designation would allow the City to preserve the forests, wetlands and pastureland that give Prior Lake its greatest appeal to its residents and visitors . In addition, by designating the Vierling parcels as Rural Residential , the City would be fulfilling another one of its objectives stated in its Comp . Plan. The City states in its Comp . Plan that one of its objectives that it wants to "maintain a variety of residential densities . " (Comp . Plan at 25 and 113 ) . By zoning the Vierlings ' property as office park and residential high density, very little rural density property will be left in the City, in fact only one area on the outskirts of the City would remain rural density. The City zoned large amounts of area in the City limits as Urban Low/Medium Density and Urban High Density (Comp . Land Use Map) . It is also important to note that other cities and counties have had great success in preserving a mixture of densities . Dakota County ' s mixture of towns , cities and farms have had a great appeal , resulting in tremendous population gains . (Metropolitan Council, A FARMER FIGHTS To SAVE AGRICULTURAL LAND , see www . metrocouncil . org/mnsmartgrowth/citizens_ stelzel .htm ; and Peterson, David, " Loss of rural land accelerating in state , study finds , " Minneapolis Star Tribune, January 11 , 2001 ) . Therefore , if it maintains the zoning recommended by the Comp . Plan , the City will not be meeting one of its key objectives , maintaining a variety of residential densities . Letter to Planning Commission Page 5 from Patrick J. Kelly and January 15, 2001 Chad D. Lemmons 2 . The City ' s Mission to Preserve Open Spaces. By designating the Vierling property as rural residential, the City would create open spaces which are called for by its Comp . Plan. In its Comp . Plan, the City states that "major open spaces should be planned an provided" and that "preservation and treatment of open space shall be a major consideration in planning and review of all types of development within the City. " (Comp . Plan at 38 and 106) (emphasis added) . A large portion of the Vierling parcels has been designated by the city as either High Density Residential or Business Office Park. (Comp . Land Use Map) . The City defines High Density Residential as " densities up to 30 units per acres . " (Comp . Plan at 48 ) . It defines Business Office Park as "business and office park; corporate headquarters ; and professional and administrative offices ; and limited research, development and manufacturing facilities . " (Comp . Plan at 58 ) . These types of land use of the Vierling parcels would not allow for open spaces to be provided. The Rural/Residential designation calls for one dwelling unit per 40 acres , which would provide for this desired open space . By designating the property Rural/Residential , the City would be achieving its objectives set forth in its Comp . Plan by preserving open spaces because rural/residential calls for one dwelling unit per 40 acres . With very little property designated by the City as rural/residential , giving the Vierling property this designation is the only way for the City to maintain its objective of preserving open spaces . Based on the above and the attached Exhibits , the Vierlings ' request to amend the Comp . Plan should be granted because of historical, environmental and logistical reasons . Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully yours , KELLY & FAWCETT, P .A. Patrick J . Kelly Chad D . Lemmons Appendix Comp . Plan Selected 2020 Comp . Plan sections pp . 25 -26 , 32 , 37- 38 , 42 , 44 , 4849 , 58 , 101 - 102 , 106 , 113 , 117 , 124, 134, 154 , 2005 254- 255 , 2719 A41 A-2 Maps Comp . Land Use Plan Map , December 28 , 1999 City of Prior Lake Land Use Plan Map , Fig 4- 1 , p . 129 Primary Area of MUSA Acreage Allocation Map , dated December 29 , 1999 Comprehensive Water Plan Map , Ex . 8 .3 Watermain Map , Fig . 81 Sewer Comprehensive Plan Map , Fig . 7- 1 Existing Sanitary Sewer System Map Articles Metropolitan Council, A FARMER FIGHTS TO SAVE AGRICULTURAL LAND , see www . metrocouncil . org/mnsmartgrowth/citizens_stelzel .htm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Peterson, David, " Loss of rural land accelerating in state , study finds , " Minneapolis Star Tribune, January 11 , 2001 Neighbors Email from Kathleen and David Sandvik, dated January 12 , 2001 Letter from Michael & Linda Smith, dated January 11 , 2001 Letter from Kerry Smith, dated January 11 , 2001 Letter from Karen J . (Koskelin) Lucy, dated January 11 , 2001 SCOTT COUNTY FINANCE DIVISION TAXATION DEPARTMENT 200 FOURTH AVENUE WEST SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 ; . (612) 496- 8115 LEROY . ARNOLDI Fax : (612) 496- 8135 T DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION DIRECTOR larnoldi&o . scott.mmus httpwwww . co .scott.mmus January 18 , 2001 Ralph Teschner City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE : Taxable classifications Dear Ralph . As a follow up to our conversation relative to property tax classification, agricultural property is assessed as such, regardless of zoning, if it is used as a farming operation. Agricultural property enjoys the lowest rate of taxation. Agricultural property can also be classified as " Green Acres" thus enabling the deferment of special assessments . In addition, upon timely application the property can be • placed into "Agricultural Preserve", resulting in the potential of three references to agricultural property . What does this mean in tax language?? Agricultural classification : The lowest taxable classification of property Green Acres : A subset of agricultural classification. Generally resulting in a ten percent reduction in market value from the regular Agricultural classification . Agricultural Preserve : Agricultural property would be eligible for an additional credit of $ 1 . 50 per acre . I trust this will shed some light on a portion of the classification used for property taxes . If you have any questions feel free to call . Sincerely, Leroy T . Arnoldi Director of Taxation, Scott County tit PRip� NESo CITY OF PRIOR LAKE MINNESOTA 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTED BY THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL , APRIL , 1999 APPROVED BY THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL, NOVEMBER, 1999 y � : GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES A. GOAL : SUITABLE HOUSING AND ENVIRONMENT Encourage the development of suitable housing in a desirable environment. OBJECTIVE No. l : Provide opportunities for a variety of affordable high quality housing. POLICIES : a. Codes and ordinances relating to development, redevelopment, and maintenance of housing shall be adopted and periodically reviewed to ensure specific direction is provided regarding affordable uses in each district and regarding minimum development standards. b. Review annually the current and planned programs of the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority. c. Maintain development standards and housing policies that allow for low and moderate cost housing opportunities . d. Develop and consider for adoption a code enforcement program for existing housing. e. Develop and maintain regulations that permit a mix of housing types, sizes and price ranges to be provided throughout the City. OBJECTIVE No. 2 : Maintain a choice of and encourage development of quality residential environments . POLICIES . a. Maintain a variety of residential densities (dwelling units per acre) . b . Ensure that* public services and on-site improvements are completed at the time ofresidential-development. - .--- - ---___-- ------- - - -____ -- __ _ -- c. The burden of a satisfactory transition from one density or dwelling type to another is the rests with the developer seeking development plan approval . d. Discourage new residential subdivisions in isolated areas that have little or no potential to either develop into a viable neighborhood or to assimilate with an established neighborhood. e. Consideration of development plans for multiple dwellings in areas so designated on the Land Use Guide Plan should include the following design-related items : ( 1 ) New developments should not isolate existing single family dwellings by inhibiting pedestrian and/or vehicular access . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 25 Chapter 2 (2) New development completely surrounded by single family dwellings, should be discouraged in favor of large scale planned unit developments which are more conducive to a mix of housing styles with shared amenities. (3) There should be convenient access to collector and arterial streets and to available transit so to not unduly contribute to congestion on local residential streets. (4) Large common open areas may provide an effective transitional use to other uses . (5) Location near permanent public and private open spaces may compensate for the impact of the higher density. f. Create and enhance neighborhoods that provide parks and open spaces , public access to natural amenities located on and adjacent to the site, and pedestrian linkages throughout and among adjacent neighborhoods . g. Incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum feasible extent. h. Provide pedestrian access to commercial and industrial centers, public lands, and schools. i. Avoid designs that isolate neighborhoods . Provide traffic or pedestrian circulation within and between developments . J9 Avoid or mitigate encroachment by incompatible land uses which can have a negativeimp act on the residential living environment. Mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, the use of open space, berms, dense landscaping vegetation, and similar buffers . k. Allow higher density multiple dwelling housing in areas within close proximity of existing support services and facilities , and where there is adequate access to collector and arterial streets . I& Ensure new development includes design features such as buffering, screening, and spatial separation from collector and arterial streets; and from anticipated adverse environmentalimpacts including, but not limited to , noise and air pollution. in. Link neighborhoods to each other, and to parks, schools and commercial centers via local streets or pedestrian trails . n. Ensure subdivisions are designed to avoid direct private drive access from and to major collector and arterial streets . o . Promote innovative subdivision design and housing products through the use of the planned unit development process and similar techniques . p . Avoid locating high density housing to primarily serve as a buffer or as a land use suited for absorbing negative impacts of adjacent land uses . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 26 Chapter 2 g. Promote proactive rather than reactive public safety measures through regular preparation of a five-year public safety strategic plan. h. Work cooperatively with the school district to determine the pedestrian needs of the student population and develop safe walking routes to school as needed. i . Encourage the consideration of appropriate crime control measures in the design and construction of public and private buildings. OBJECTIVE No. 4 : Enact and maintain policies and ordinances to ensure the safety and preservation of property. POLICIES . a. Require high standards of design and materials used for all structures . b . Maintain effective inspection services to ensure compliance with development and building codes. c . Ensure that all properties and structures are adequately maintained. d. Provide for fees to cover cost of development and preservation services . e. Identify in advance the need for redevelopment of existing residential structures and plan for such action. OBJECTIVE No. 5 : Provide for conservation and protection of the natural environment. POLICIES . a. Provide adequate regulations to prevent the development or existence of any industrial or commercial endeavor which will, through its operation, create a hazard to the environment. b . Require all developers to retain the natural environment as much as possible such as the preservation of desirable trees shrubs, land forms, swamps, and ponding areas . c. Effectively and uniformly regulate the development of structures and other land uses in or near flood plain and drainage areas . d. Nonconforming land uses should be eliminated over time . e. Develop and maintain communications with school district to ensure proper location of educational structures. f. Require that any waste disposal or processing facility meets or exceeds all federal, state, and local requirements, and be located in an area which will not jeopardize future development of the City. i Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 32 Chapter 2 E. GOAL : HUMAN DEVELOPMENT Create an environment in which all citizens have the opportunity to develop their full potential. OBJECTIVE No. 1 : Encourage the development of a broad range of educational and learning opportunities for persons of all ages . POLICIES : a. Coordinate with the school district in school site selection. b . Encourage joint development and utilization of education, recreation, and social service facilities and services. c. A library should be retained within the City unless an affordable regional facility can be provided elsewhere that provides equal or better service. d. Encourage the location of preschool and day care facilities in the vicinity of major activity and employment centers . OBJECTIVE No. 2 : Promote leisure time opportunities and experiences which are rewarding for the individual and families . POLICIES . General a. Establish and maintain a comprehensive park and trail systems plan; efforts should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and recreation industry objectives . b . Park construction and maintenance should be aggressive and completed in a timely fashion. c. Develop a year-round system of recreation programs which appeals to all citizens of the community. d. Periodically conduct research and surveys to identify cost effective ways of responding to community leisure needs . e . Major sites for park and recreation purposes should be acquired in advance of their actual need to assure a desirable location in relation to the area to be served. f. Establish and maintain a park and open space land dedication policy for new subdivisions . g . Acquisition and development of land for parks and trails should take into consideration potential conflicts with adjacent land uses and on-going maintenance costs . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 37 Chapter 2 h. City funds should be available for land acquisition in those cases where the Comprehensive Park Plan requires more open space than the developer is required to dedicate. Neighborhood Level i . Each neighborhood identified by this Plan should contain a centrally located park within walking distance of all homes, oriented to small child and parent activities rather than to organized athletic activities J . Facilities should be jointly shared with elementary schools where possible. Programs should reflect consideration of neighborhood needs and desires and should take maximum advantage of site capabilities. Communi , Level k. Major public open space and activity centers should be made available within each quadrant of the City, not only for environmental contrast and passive recreation, but for those major organized active recreation and indoor group programs which cannot practically be conducted at school centers . 1. Major open spaces should be planned and provided, notwithstanding facilities owned or planned by other jurisdictions, and the plans should incorporate a variety of natural physical elements though not necessarily within every park area. in. Since the passive open space involved in City parks should be oriented to the unique natural features of the land which help establish the character for each quadrant of the city, a central location in each quadrant for City open space is not essential. n. If location and size permit, neighborhood park facilities can be incorporated into the design and development of a community park. o . A large nature-study preserve should be provided, possibly, though not necessarily as part of a City park. Small neighborhood preserves should be acquired through the land development process . p . A system of trailways should be developed in the City to link major areas of interest with special attention given to separation of pedestrian and bicycle traffic from vehicular traffic . q. The City should make plans to either acquire or develop desired facilities which happen to be privately owned as principal uses , rather than assuming those recreation facilities will continue . r. The preservation and treatment of open space shall be major considera. tion in planning and review of all types of development within the City . E Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 38 Chapter 2 DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA These objectives and criteria are intended to guide residential development and redevelopment throughout the City; they complement the objectives and the development location criteria for the respective residential areas described in this Plan. Development Objectives 1 . Create and enhance neighborhoods that provide parks and open spaces, public access to natural amenities located on and adjacent to the site, and pedestrian linkages throughout and among adjacent neighborhoods. 2 . Incorporate historical and natural features to the maximum feasible extent. 3 . Provide pedestrian access to commercial and industrial centers, public lands, and schools . 4 . Avoid designs that isolate neighborhoods . Provide traffic or pedestrian circulation within and between developments. 5 . Avoid or mitigate encroachment by incompatible land uses which can have a negative impact on the residential living environment. Mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, the use of open space, berms, dense landscaping vegetation, and similar buffers. 6 . Allow higher density multiple dwelling housing in areas within close proximity of existing support services and facilities, and where there is adequate access to collector and arterial streets . 7 . Ensure new development includes design features such as buffering, screening, and spatial separation from collector and arterial streets ; and from anticipated adverse environmental impacts including, but nottinited to , noise and air pollution. 8 . Link neighborhoods to each other, and to parks , schools and commercial centers via local streets or pedestrian trails . 9 . Ensure subdivisions are designed to avoid direct private drive access from and to major- collector and-arterial-streets. 10 . Promote innovative subdivision design and housing products through the use of the planned unit development process and similar techniques . 11 . Avoid locating high density housing to primarily serve as a buffer or as a land use suited for absorbing negative impacts of adjacent land uses . High density housing should only be developed in those areas near support and commercial services . 12 . Support development designs that are tailored to environmentally sensitive areas containing rugged topography, wetlands, and woodlands . 13 . Code enforcement shall be used to keep illegal uses and physical deterioration from compromising the value and integrity of the housing stock within the community. 14. Parking lots shall be screened to reduce theimpact upon adjacent uses . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 42 Chapter 3 RESIDENTIAL - RURAL DENSITY (R-RD) Purpose This is a special classification for all land where urban services are unavailable . Land is often designated R-RD in order to preserve large tracts of land which can eventually accommodate orderly planned urban development. This is a special category because, over time, agriculture and related uses may not be the highest and best for all land in this classification. Thus, the official Land Use Guide Plan may parenthetically indicate other classifications for certain R-RD land. The alternate categories reflect the city's determination that the property would be eventually conducive to some urban, rather than rural use. R-RD is primarily determined by availability of public services rather than by proximity to natural features or to facilities such as streets or certain other land uses, unlike the other Residential designations. Agriculture is the primary allowable use, pending the approval and construction of urban services . This is a means of guiding the ultimate urban development of the community whereby the R-RD classification may reserve land for another classification, when urban services are physically available. Conversion of agricultural land for recreational open space uses in the rural service area is appropriate, provided the uses can function in a manner that is compatible with both agricultural uses and the lack of urban services . Such uses however should be planned and designed to facilitate eventual transition to urban services . Development Location Criteria All land where public sanitary sewer is unavailable is classified R-RD . While some land areas outside the MUSA are shown in other land use categories, these are intended to reflect a build-out condition and the R-RD Designation will be changed to reflect these ultimate uses when utilities become available. - Density Maximum rural density is one dwelling unit per 40 acres . Minimum Requirements for Development Forty acres and frontage on a public street. Utilities No public utilities available. i Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 44 Chapter 3 URBAN HIGH DENSITY (RRHD) Purpose This classification is characterized by dwellings other than single family detached houses at the higher residential densities. The dominant construction form is attached homes and apartments ; single family detached houses may be allowed in a Planned Unit Development. This classification is intended to provide an opportunity to create population centers and to accommodate the demand for affordable housing located near community activity areas . Development Location Criteria • Development of attached homes and multiple family dwellings is appropriate near major parks and other open space, along collector streets and near Town Center and other commercial centers . • The wide range of possible housing styles, and development design flexibility make it feasible to form a suitable transition to and from adjacent existing or proposed uses, and to relate new development to most terrain and other natural features. • Final density and development design will be a function of adopted zoning and subdivision standards and procedures. Density Densities up to 30 units per acre may be allowed, where developments with higher density { and those with a mix of housing styles will primarily be realized in Planned Unit Developments . Density should be expressed through one or more zoning classifications which, among other standards, reflect various minimum lot dimension and area requirements . Minimum Requirements for Development A site area of at least 1 , 500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit for apartments should be retained; provided, a density reduction will be often necessary in environmentally sensitive and Shoreland Management Areas . - The minimum area for Planned-Unit Developments- should- be- i-0- acres- in order to provide for the open space and location of multiple family dwellings required for higher density developments . Public street frontage is required for all development, unless alternate access is expressly approved by the City for a Planned Unit Development or similar arrangement. Utilities All city utilities required; utilities must be at least under contract for construction in order to classify land R-HD . S Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 48 Chapter 3 Typical Uses Two-family dwellings, townhouses, apartments, and other designs, including single family manufactured dwellings and single family dwellings by conditional use permit and/or Planned Unit Developments boarding houses; schools ; churches ; recreational open space, parks, and play grounds with public utilities , and public buildings. Corresponding Zoning R4 (High Density Residential) , including provision for Planned Unit Developments needed toimplement the range of allowable densities and to express the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for this classification. t i Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 49 Chapter 3 COMMERCIAL—BUSINESS AND OFFICE PARK (C-BO) Purpose This classification is characterized by high-amenity planned developments which have a low traffic generation rate and a site utilization that is compatible with natural features. Primary uses are corporate headquarters ; and professional and administrative offices ; and limited research, development and manufacturing facilities . Related secondary uses such as restaurants where food is ordered and consumed on the premises, hotels, and other businesses having limited contact with the general public and no retail sale of products could be allowed as conditional uses. Office parks, often formed as Planned Unit Developments, can serve small professional services in a group setting whereas such uses might otherwise be located in retail centers or in scattered freestanding buildings . The high design standards should ensure compatibility with high density housing and the potential for shared parking, open space, convenient housing and service, and reduction of traffic generation onto public streets . Retailing should be allowed only as an accessory use when it is clearly incidental to the primary use. Development Location Criteria High level of transition to all proximate residential land and development; near arterial access points, i . e. , intersections of arterial and/or major collector streets ; high amenity features are very conducive to " gateway" recognition; adjoining or very near existing or planned industrial or multi-residential areas ; may develop in conjunction with major commercial centers . Maximum Building Coverage 35 % with all yard and parking minimum standards met or exceeded. Minimum Requirements for Development 1 acre Public street frontage is required for all development, unless alternate access is expressly approved by the City for a Planned Unit Development or similar arrangement. Utilities All city utilities required; utilities must be under contract for construction for land to be classified C-BO. Typical Uses High amenity facilities for corporate headquarters, professional, administrative, executive, medical, research (exclusive of heavy manufacturing and distribution) , and governmental offices without merchandising ; very limited retailing incidental to the primary use, e. g. , news stands, Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 58 Chapter 3 HOUSING ANALYSIS , ISSUES AND NEEDS In general, the City's housing supply is adequate. The new luxury and move-up housing adds an important element to the City's supply and gives it diversity, not typically experienced in the past except for the houses and properties on the lake. The lake itself probably adds 10 to 20 percent of the market value to the houses which abut the lake and for those with access rights through a nearby marina. The percentage of lower cost or affordable housing is likely to drop because : 1 ) many of these units are being remodeled, expanded or demolished and 2) the volume and cost of new construction. Within the next 10 to 15 years, virtually all the cottages or summer homes are likely to be eliminated. However, the actual number of affordable units could increase if low cost housing is included in some new subdivisions. A reasonable supply of single family, duplex, and townhouse rentals exist in the community. These categories total approximately 258 rental units, which amounts to 6 percent of the total single family, duplex, and townhouse housing stock. One apparent gap in the housing supply appears to be the inadequate supply of newer apartment units . A freestanding growth community or a mature suburban community could be expected to have from 25 to 30 percent of its housing stock in apartments or multiple family developments . Only 12 . 85 percent of Prior Lake's housing supply is classified as multiple family or apartment. This percent is likely to continue to decrease based on the market demand for single family housing. The vacancy rate could be an indicator that there is an adequate amount of multiple family and rental units in the community. However, Prior Lake does not have any new or modern apartment developments which incorporate amenities such as underground parking, swimming pool, community room, etc . This need and consideration of families who would occupy such units has been neglected primarily because the City' s focus has been on family units abutting the lake and the absence of high employment centers has not created the demand. In addition, lack of direct freeway access also affects this housing type . The new river crossing and State Highway 169 bypass along with the attraction of more industry to Prior Lake and increases in empty-nesters will justify construction of this type of housing . Housing conditions are excellent and benefit substantially by the amenity and - - - oppor if ties`provided by�no- -rZake and Spring La�The akes contri ute to some minor problems since recreational opportunities place additional burden on garages and houses relative to storing and maintaining recreational equipment. Too often the yards serve as areas for storage beyond a reasonable amount. Listed below are some of the assets and problems related to the lakes and the recreational opportunities : Assets 1 . The lake's shape with its many bays provides a substantial shoreline which allows many properties to have access to the lake. 2 . Lake marinas tend to spread the beneficial value of the lake impact beyond the lake. 3 . Steep topography and wooded areas add interest and provide scenic views . . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 101 Chapter 3 4. The lake prevents through traffic from using the residential streets . Problems 1 . Fifteen percent of the yards were categorized as inadequate because of outside storage of boats, trailers, inoperable vehicles or other conditions. 2 . Lake cabins and seasonal houses create some minor problems because they affect the visual conditions - but most are likely to be removed because of land values . 3 . Some site development problems are related to setbacks, hills, slopes and the lakes . For example, less than minimum front yard setbacks exist in some locations and garages are sometimes located directly adjacent to the road. (Special setbacks may be required when a road abuts a lake and when the lot is affected by a shoreland setback of 75 feet.) 4. Certain locations have an obsolete platting layout with dirt roads and a poor lot configuration. 5 . In some cases a lot is split by a street. 6 . Because some residential areas are faced with inappropriate on-street parking of trailers, some streets are signed prohibiting such parking, but the signs are often ignored. Other observations not necessarily attributed to the lake include the following : 1 . Parking of trucks, cars and other vehicles in front yards (grassy area) is quite common. 2 . Inadequate yard conditions often times appears in pairs or more, suggesting that the manner in which one owner uses property affects how others use property. 3 . The size of the lot and the intensity of the yard deficiencies impact the impression of the neighborhood. For example, more deficiencies on smaller lots tends to establish a more blighting condition than would be the case with the same number of deficiencies on larger lots . If the house and garage are small, it can cause the owner to use the yard for activities and functions that might otherwise be conducted inside . 4 . There is a correlation between dirt roads and house and yard conditions . 5 . A substantial amount of infrastructure improvement and new housing is underway in — -- -the-Shakopee- -d-ewankanten-Siou-x-community.-4n-some-locations-conditions-are - - - - - --- spotty because of older and obsolete dwellings , the number of dumpsters in the area and yard conditions . Housing is quite mixed in terms of type and size, ranging from mobile homes to large new houses . Some units have attached garages as well as detached garages . From a demographic stand point Prior Lake is becoming more diversified in terms of family size, age, and income. Housing costs are accelerating primarily because new subdivisions are offering substantial amenity, relatively large lots and construction of more housing for the move-up market. However, a significant amount of affordable and moderate cost housing remains available . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 102 Chapter 3 c. Residential Development - Ensure that public services and on-site improvements are completed at the time of residential development. d. Industrial / Commercial Encroachment - Protect residential areas from industrial and commercial encroachment to the maximum practicable extent; recognizing that the degree of encroachment may vary with isolated single family developments, which are part of an urban neighborhood. e. Developer' s Burden - The burden of a satisfactory transition from one density or dwelling type to another rests with the developer seeking development plan approval. f. Viable Neighborhoods - Discourage new residential subdivisions in isolated areas that have little or no potential to either develop into a viable neighborhood or to assimilate with an established neighborhood. g. Multiple family Development - Consideration of development plans for multiple family dwellings in areas so designated on the Land Use Guide Plan, should include the following design-related items : 1 ) New developments should not isolate existing single family dwellings by inhibiting pedestrian and/or vehicular access . 2) New development completely surrounded by single family dwellings, should be discouraged in favor of large scale planned unit developments which {r are more conducive to a mix of housing styles with shared amenities . 3 ) There should be convenient access to collector and arterial streets and to available transit so to not unduly contribute to congestion on local residential streets . 4) Large common open areas may provide an effective transitional use to other uses . h . Code Enforcement Program - Develop and consider for adoption a code enforcement program for existing housing . OBJECTIVE 3 - Open Space Preservation : Provide suitable passive open space for the preservation of the natural environment and the enjoyment of residents . POLICIES : a. Ponding and Wetlands - Retain natural ponding areas and, as applicable per state law, wetlands . b . Large Planned Unit Developments - Promote platting of large planned unit developments . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 106 Chapter 3 Policies a. Density : Maintain a variety of residential densities (units per acre) ACTION STEPS As noted previously, the Comprehensive Plan has increased the range of permitted densities in the City from the previous high of 18 units per acre to 30 units per acre. The zoning ordinance expected to be adopted by March, 1997 will reflect this increase in maximum densities . b . Community structure concept: Utilize a community structure concept that is focused upon neighborhoods as the framework for developing and redeveloping residential areas . ACTION STEPS The Comprehensive Plan contains a section of specific objectives for each neighborhood in the City. These objectives cover virtually every aspect of community development, including land use, transportation, parks and open space, aesthetics, housing and capital improvements . These objectives will be addressed in the zoning ordinance amendments to the extent possible . Other items which are not zoning-related will serve as input to the City Capital Improvement Program. It is not possible to attach a time frame to this policy as most items will be accomplished incrementally on a year to year basis . c. Residential Development: Insure that public services and on-site improvements are completed at the time of residential development. ACTION STEPS The subdivision ordinance requires that public utilities and on-site improvements be installed before building permits or certificates of occupancy are issued. This process will be refined during the review of the subdivision ordinance which will be completed by March, 1997 . d. Industrial/Commercial : Protect residential areas from industrial and commercial encroachment to the maximum practicable extent, recognizing that the degree of encroachment may vary with isolated single family developments which are part of an urban neighborhood. ACTION STEPS The Comprehensive Plan proposes new commercial and industrial development in areas which are either remote from existing residential areas or where natural buffers such as wetlands are available. The new zoning ordinance will strengthen the requirements for screening and buffering between residential and non-residential land uses . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 113 Chapter 3 Protection of Watercourses The surface water management chapter details the policies and recommended actions to be taken to protect the streams and lakes within the City. In addition, the City enforces a Floodplain Management ordinance and has recently adopted significant amendments to the Shoreland Management ordinance consistent with the revised rules promulgated by the Department of Natural Resources . Unique and Endangered Species Objective 5 provides for the conservation and protection of the natural environment and related policies include developing regulations which will protect the environment and requiring developers to retain as much of the natural environment as possible . Presently, the City is not aware of the presence of any endangered species within the City. Prevention of Premature Development The City presently has a significant portion of its ' land area located outside of the Municipal Urban Service Area. Approximately 380 acres of this land is enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program. Additional acreage within the MUSA is enrolled in the Green Acres program. Policies in the plan include discouraging or prohibiting urban development beyond existing utility service areas . Extension of the MUSA is governed by the Metropolitan Council and presumably any requested extensions will be evaluated by the policies outlined in the Regional Blueprint. Mineral Extraction In 1991 , the City conducted a study of the potential for mineral extraction in the City. It was determined that there were no gravel deposits of significant commercial potential within the City and subsequently, in 1992 , the City amended its ' zoning ordinance to eliminate mineral extraction as a conditional use in the Agricultural District. The current Zoning Ordinance allows excavation as a temporary use with approval of a conditional use permit. Historic Natural Resource Areas The natural resource area of greatest historical significance is Prior Lake and Spring Lake . Currently, the City enforces both Shoreland and Floodplain management ordinances which regulate development near Prior and Spring Lakes . In addition, the surface water management chapter of this plan contains a number of policies and recommended actions will act to minimize adverse impacts on these two major water bodies . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 117 Chapter 3 The growth of neighboring communities, the completion and opening of the new bridge over the Minnesota River at County Road 18 and State Highway 101 , the connection of County Road 21 with I-35 east of the City, and the development of intense commercial and recreational uses by the Mdewakanton Dakota Community will likely press development at a faster pace than anticipated by the projections made earlier in the planning process. The Metropolitan Council projections assumed residential development to proceed at a rate of 123 units per year. For the above reasons, the City has assumed a higher rate of growth. Constraints to development are both natural and man-made. Physical constraints include topographical conditions, water bodies, soil conditions, and surface characteristics (wetlands, for example). These are relatively easy to quantify and usually are thus deducted from the total calculated amount of land in the MUSA. "Developable land, " therefore can be determined as a net number of acres . There are some man-made constraints to development which are due to external forces beyond the City's effective control. Examples include the general economy and interest rates, especially as they apply to construction; state laws and programs that may mandate certain limits on development tools (tax increment financing, for example) and on the City's ability to generate revenues for services through taxes ; and regional policies regarding housing and the expansion of the MUSA. Other constraints include local policies that are defined by the City's vision for the future, including the desire for a rate of development that may be lower than private interests would prefer. Certain land uses may be preferred over others and this will be reflected in the City Plans and regulations . The development of the Mystic Lake complex can be viewed as an asset which provides employment opportunities, recreation and hospitality facilities available to the community, and a destination widely identified with the City) . It can also be perceived as a constraint upon City development as it represents competitive facilities that reduce opportunities for similar uses on taxable real estate, traffic impact upon neighborhoods that would otherwise be controlled if the destination uses and operations were under public jurisdiction, and regional agency agreements with the Mdewakanton Dakota Community that provide sanitary sewer via lines through the Rural Service Area despite regional policies that strive to retain the Rural Service Area notwithstanding the desire of landowners to also use the facilities . The City's primary asset is its people and its continuing desire to plan for the future, including redevelopment and preservation of areas that established the physical and social, and political character of the community. This plan accounts for the various assets and constraints through the various elements . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 124 Chapter 3 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING AND FUTURE TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM As with all municipalities , jurisdiction over the roadway system is shared among three levels of government; the state, the county and the City. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT) , through its Metro District, maintains the trunk highway system on behalf of the state and Scott County maintains the County State-Aid Highway (CSAH) and County Road systems . The remaining streets and roadways are the responsibility of the City. Traffic volumes at selected locations on the Prior Lake street system are shown in Figure 4-3 . These values are obtained from traffic counts made by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT) , Scott County and the City of Prior Lake. Multi-lane roadways are shown in Figure 44. PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS Capacity improvements to state and county roads in the City of Prior Lake or the vicinity are already programmed including the following : • TH 13 --That portion of TH 13 that extends from CSAH 44 to CSAH 42 in the City of Prior Lake will be upgraded to improve capacity, operation and safety. The proposed design is a "two-lane divided" with left and right tum lanes at access points . The City of Prior Lake has signed an agreement with MN/DOT on appropriate intersection geometries . Funding has been approved for improvements at CSAH 12 (Spring Lake Rd.) and for traffic signal coordination/interconnection from Fish Point Road to CSAR 44 . • CSAH 42--This roadway is currently four-lane from Ferndale Avenue to TH 13 . An upgrade to four-lane divided from CSAH 17 in Shakopee to Ferndale Avenue is programmed for 1999 , which will establish a continuous four-lane divided facility from CSAH 17 to the City of Apple Valley . Improvements to roadways outside of the City of Prior Lake over the next few years will also have major impacts on circulation between Prior Lake and adjacent municipalities : • CSAH 21 - A new roadway is programmed for construction in 2001 -2002 north of Prior Lake connecting CSAR 18 and CSAH 16 . It will ultimately connect to existing CSAH 21 at CSAH 42 . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 134 Chapter 4 TRANSIT PLAN INTRODUCTION ity of transit service, the number of Prior Lake In keeping with the limited availabil residents using transit is modest, although stable. Continued population growth in Prior Lake, severe congestion in the 1-35W corridor and transit services improvements will likely increase transit ridership . Human service needs include .transportation, which are met by a variety of transit options . The City supports the continued development of appropriate transit services in the area in coordination with the Metropolitan Council Transportation Division, the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority and other transit providers . The City will work with these and other organizations and individuals to identify the demand for public transit and to design new services and facilities . Well-utilized transit services can contribute to congestion relief on major roadways in the community while providing important mobility for certain residents . TRANSIT NEEDS The 1996 Metropolitan Council ' s Transportation Development Guide Chapter/Policx Plan ( 1996) identifies Prior Lake as generally lying in the "outer suburban" transit zone . The following services are most appropriate in that area: • Peak period express bus service • Ridesharing • Local circulation provided with small vehicles or dial-a-ride type vehicles EXISTING TRANSIT SYSTEM Regular Route Transit Service Located within the Metropolitan Council metropolitan transit taxing district, City residents are taxed for regional transit service through the property tax levy. Effective in 1990, the City of Prior Lake "opted-out" of the regular metropolitan transit system and, along with other nearby communities , established locally designed transit services . The intent was to increase the level of service and to develop new services that were tailored to local needs . The opt-out cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Rosemount, Prior Lake and Savage joined together to create the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) . The MVTA Board of Commissioners includes representatives from each of the cities along with representatives from Dakota and Scott Counties . An Executive Director administers contracts for services with bus operators, develops funding agreements with the Metropolitan Council, conducts marketing programs , monitors existing transit services and develops new transit services . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 154 Chapter 4 funding requirements, increase park dedication fees, dedicated park tax, bond referendum, gambling tax, etc . The 1997 Parks and Library Referendum was successful and included funds for the new Library/Resource Center, irrigation and lights at the Ponds, new playground equipment, Lakefront Park development, and Community Park/Athletic Complex development. This referendum will take care of some our community needs for many years to come . However, this is a one time development resource, we need to be aware of continued growth, equipment replacements, improvements, and ongoing maintenance of our parks and trails . Needs for Indoor Recreation Space In planning the future of the community consideration should be given to the need for indoor recreation space. The new Library/Resource Center will accommodate our dance program and be available for community events and meetings . The Dakota community currently has a facility which is open to the public for swimming and athletic activities on a fee basis . It may be possible to include space in a future school that would be available for recreational programming. Community school facilities have been very successful in other communities and communications with school district personnel would include the possibilities of a community school facility. Future Needs Assessment and Communily As Prior Lake continues to develop it is critical to the success of the parks and recreation system that there is an ongoing analysis of the parks and recreation needs of the community. It is imperative that a community survey be conducted so that future park and trail development is driven by the needs of the community and so that recreation programs are based on the community needs . Ongoing communications needs to exist between city staff and the community. This communication can be accomplished through surveys, program evaluations, public meetings, and open invitations to the public to attend Parks Advisory Committee meetings . As the community develops there will undoubtedly be an increase in school age children that will participate in sports and recreation programs . With this increase there will be demands for additional parks and athletic fields . As mentioned there is a conceptual plan that could meet the existing needs of the community but without further studies and surveys it would be difficult at best to try to determine the future needs of the community. Future parks , trails , and recreation programs should have a direct correlation to the demographics and socio - economic status of the community. t Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 200 Chapter 5 PLANNING AND LAND USE �t General Wastewater collection and treatment needs are dictated by the land use, population density, and the planning period for the study area. Each new connection to the system adds to the wastewater flow in the sanitary sewer system. Land use and population densities have been developed and discussed in the City ' s overall comprehensive plan. This information will be utilized in conjunction with the planning periods defined here to analyze the City' s wastewater system . PIanning Period The planning period for municipal engineering projects generally coincides with the useful life of the particular utility system. Under normal use conditions, mechanical equipment such as lift station pumps is expected to last about 20 years with good maintenance. Underground structural components like collection system pipes are typically designed for 50 years of service . For this update, the MCES has requested that the year 2020 be used for the planning period. In order to consider the "worst case", the analysis will include a projection of the ultimate development of the City of Prior Lake including all of the current City limits and the "orderly annexation area" that may develop at some time. Land Use The City of Prior Lake Land Use Plan is presented and discussed in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan. Basic data from the City ' s Land Use Plan will be used for projecting the future wastewater needs of the City. The current MUSA is entirely within the City limits but it does not include all of the land within the City limits . ' Development of land within the MUSA requires the extension of municipal sanitary sewer services . Land outside the MUSA cannot be connected to the municipal sewer system and must be developed with larger individual lots to accommodate onsite wastewater treatment. As the land inside the current MUSA is developed, there will be interest in expanding the MUSA to include additional land within the current City limits and possibly, the orderly annexation area. b Since it is difficult to anticipate exactly which parcels of land will develop first, the City is utilizing an "undesignated MUSA" for the defined area within the City limits and the orderly annexation area. The documentation required by the MCES for the undesignated MUSA is included in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan. { Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 254 Chapter 7 population increase has stabilized since 1990. Population projections for this report were based on the Prior Lake 2010 Comprehensive Plan and discussions with City planners . On this basis and also based on the traffic analysis planning results , the ultimate population of Prior Lake has been calculated to be 28 , 950. The past populations from 1980 to 1995 appear on Table 3 -9 in Chapter 3 . Also shown in the table are the population projections for the years 2005 , 2010, and 2020. The past population and population projections are shown graphically as Figure 3 .6 in Chapter 3 . Table 3 -9 in Chapter 3 also presents numbers of households and the persons per household ratios . This data indicates that, while the total population and number of households are increasing in Prior Lake, the number of persons per household is decreasing. This is a trend that is occurring throughout the Twin Cities at this time. The City of Prior Lake Land Use Plan is presented and discussed in the "Land Use" section of the comprehensive plan. Basic data from the City' s Land Use Plan will be used for projecting the future wastewater needs of the City. The current MUSA is entirely within the City limits but it does not include all of the land within the City limits . Development of land within the MUSA requires the extension of municipal sanitary sewer services . Land outside the MUSA cannot be connected to the municipal sewer system and must be developed with- larger individual lots to accommodate onsite wastewater treatment. As the land inside the current MUSA is developed, there will be interest in expanding the MUSA to include additional land within the current City limits and possibly, the orderly annexation area. Since it is difficult to anticipate exactly which parcels of land will develop first, the City is utilizing an "undesignated MUSA" for the defined area within the City limits and the orderly annexation area. The documentation required by the MCES for the undesignated MUSA is included in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan. PAST WATER USAGE RECORDS One of the mostimportant aspects of any comprehensive water study is having a clear understanding of how a city's consumers use water. With this information and accurate records of past usage, projections can be made of future water demand. A course of action can then be developed to meet this demand. The City of Prior Lake maintains records of the annual volume of raw water pumped from its wells, as well as the volume of water sold to its customers . These records permit evaluation of all the components of water demand--the water used by residential, commercial/industrial, and institutional users . The demand imposed on a water system can be defined as the total water consumed by users of the system in a specified period of time. Typically, daily and hourly time periods are evaluated. Daily demands are usually evaluated on the basis of average day and maximum day requirements . Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page 271 Chapter 8 APPENDIX A MISSION The following Mission Statement was adopted by the City Council on February 3 , 1997 : The City of Prior Lake is committed to serving the common good of its residents by promoting community values, environmentally sensitive community development, robust business growth, financial stability, safety, and diverse recreational opportunities. " VISIT The Vision of .the community at full development was also adopted February 6, 1995 , as part of the Strategic Plan. The ultimate community should be comprised of development which is balanced among residential, commercial, and other land uses. PRIOR LAKE STRATEGIC PLAN THE VISION Adopted February 6, 1995 Revised February 3 , 1997 Revised April, 1998 Revised March, 1999 "At buildout the City of Prior Lake will be balanced between residential, commercial and business. Strong neighborhoods and homeowner associations will characterize most developments, neighborhoods will be connected by transportation amenities for pedestrians and/or motor vehicles. Platting will be encouraged through Planned Unit Developments which preserve natural features. While single family dwellings will be the predominant housing type, townhomes (for empty nesters) and multi family developments on major arterials are expected. Annexation will be evaluated and a determination made regarding land areas to incorporate within the City. "Neighborhood commercial centers will predominate, although a few community commercial centers will exist. Commercial development will be localized primarily to major arterial intersections involving State Highway 13, County Road 42, County Road 44, County Road 21, County Road 12, County Road 82 and 83. One regional center is expected at the intersection of County Roads 42 and 83. With respect to business, the focus will be on developing a mixture including office, light industrial, high-tech and light manufacturing. Office, warehouse and tindustrial developments are expected along CR 21 . One or more corporate office Comprehensive Plan 2020 Page A- 1 Appendix A MNsmartgrowth - Citizens Profile ..., Jerry Stelzel tm rove re i4nat com ettiveness in a t+�bat econom r s fi CITIZENS rnhMat^ th .'r ., - - t 'gattery 9 Citizens Showcase news i A Farmer Fights To Save Agricultural Land ecfiives , Few people have had as great an influence in protecting Dakota County agri perspcultural land as forum • Jerry Stelzel over the past 25 years . Stelzel helped craft the Agricultural Preserves Act of 1980 while serving on a Metro Council resources M committee . The law helps farmers , through tax breaks and other incentives , to maintain their properties as farms rather than sell to developers . Stelzel supports smart growth initiatives because they help preserve rural areas . The 83 -year-old former farmer says his main goal is to retain the rural atmosphere of the county' s townships . and Applelives Valley , where two Township , not far from Rosemount thirds of the land remains agricultural . Dakota County' s mixture of towns , cities and farms has a great appeal , resulting in tremendous o to Counon insm Ironically , the high ty may be threatened quality of life that drew people by the demands of a larger population . Stelzel' s work in Dakota County resulted in his selection as Minnesota Leader of the Year Award i fromse8en other orgaota n at ons Man of the Year in 1981 and commendations ranging from the International Lions Club to the Dakota County Planning Commission . With a laugh , he likens his civic involvement to a " disease" which captured him years ago . He sees his political career as less about him , and more about Empire Township . " It' s about what you can do for the township , not what the township can do for you , " says StItownship oeW putting ow for more than three dewist on a famous line . cades . nd he ' s been doing it for thep O4{in brought to YOU bY 1.41A Mutropotitan councit a7u.Zicil 1115101 , IIa+rnpn, , ncit nrg/mnsmartcrrowth/citizens stelzel .htm zw Loss of rural land accelerating in state , stucay nnas 1 a6v. 1 " i news freetime travel homezone cars. com workavenue shopping communities Metro / Region Nation ! World Politics Business Sports Variety Opinion Fun & Games Talk Enter flie Y i +.. � 7 riUl LSEI'RIV [IE - Yo sc r *01L' Contest L . . Tools Loss of rural land accelerating in state , study zB &mail this story finds Print this page P Find related David Peterson items Star Tribune Thursday , January 11 , 2001 Days after the U . S . Census Bureau reported on just how hot Minnesota' s growth was during the 1990s, another federal agency has arrived to point out some of the cost of that growth. The rate at which development gobbled up rural land doubled during the mid ' 90s , according to newly released findings from the nation' s National Resources Inventory, the U . S . Department of Agriculture' s twice -a-decade effort to track what' s happening with farmland. The amount of developed area in Minnesota rose 12 percent in the most recent stretch, 1992 to 1997 , compared with about 6 percent in the two previous five -year periods . "What whacks me across the head like a two-by-four, " said Scott Elkins, state director of the Sierra Club , " is the fact that after people have been living in this state for 150 years , what sort of weirdness is going on that just in one five-year period we saw a 12 percent increase in the amount of urbanized land? That' s a remarkable increase over five years . " Other fmdings : . The rate at which rural land is being lost is slower than the department reported a year ago , when it first released data on 1992 -97 . The estimate then was closer to a tripling of the rate of development. A computer glitch was later found to have thrown off all the data, which had been trumpeted by anti- sprawl groups. . All of the development that has occurred in Minnesota since the inventory began, in 1982 , has only managed to trim a sliver off of Minnesota' s vast land resources : land classed as "rural" declined from 45 . 8 million acres to 45 . 4 million, or 1 . 1 percent. It' s not clear what is leading to accelerating rates of development, whether it' s sheer population growth, more affluence or other factors . Data from the 2000 census that will emerge soon will help to clarify the matter . Elkins argues that although there' s still lots of rural land, it' s troubling that the rate at which land is being developed is climbing . It' s not clear, however, whether it' s a blip or a long-term trend. Some experts maintain that as baby boomers at their peak earning years begin to leave their big homes and big yards for townhouses , summer cabins and Sun Belt retirement enclaves , the rate of loss of rural land will decline . Another question is whether the loss of rural land is accelerating simply because the state' s population is growing so rapidly, and not because land is being used h +t„ //ixixxTw cztartrihune . com/viewers/qview/cgi/gview : cgi?template=metro_a_cache&slug=lan . . . 1 / 11 /01 Loss of rural land accelerating in state, study finds more wastefully. The Census Bureau reported late last month that Minnesota' s population gain during the ' 90s (544, 380) was nearly double its gain during the 1980s (299 , 129) . That compares with the new findings of a doubling of the rate of urbanization between 1987-92 and 1992 - 97 . Elkins agreed that the comparison is intriguing, but said that, from another perspective , it looks as if land is being used more wastefully . "The population is . increasing at about 1 percent a year, " he said, "but if rural land is being developed at a rate of 12 percent in five years , then each person is using about 250 percent as much land as existing residents , if you look at it that way. " The area' s hot economy, on the other hand, definitely plays some role , he said. "People are making money and they want their piece of land. There' s nothing wrong with affluence, but it' s interesting that once they get there they want to close the door behind them. " University of Minnesota geographer Fraser Hart, who has studied the issue of lost farmland extensively, argued in a speech last summer that compared to what we have as a nation the loss is "hardly noticeable . " He added: "Most lost farmland was in marginal agricultural counties with soils of low inherent fertility and topography unsuited to modern farm machinery. . . . Much of this land probably never should have been cultivated in the first place . " David Peterson can be contacted at david. a. netersongp tartribune� cont Return to top © Copyright 2001 Star Tribune . All rights reserved . ��'�i1 • � 1.17.17.17 Q+a,-r,-ih„ YI P. cnrn /viewers/aview/clzi/gview. cgi ?template=metro_a_cache&sluff lan . . . 1 / 11 /01 Subject: Vierling Farm Date : Fri , 12 Jan 2001 17 : 18 : 16 EST From : KMSandvik@aol . com To : Sfawcett@gwest.net DATE: January 12 , 2001 TO : Kelly & Fawcett , P .A. FROM : Kathleen and David Sandvik 5410 Hampton St. NE Prior Lake 952496-3658 RE : The Vierling Farm My husband and I may not be able to attend the public hearing on January 16 , 2001 . We wanted to assist the Vierling Family in their effort to enroll their property into the Agricultural Preserve Program so that their land may remain farmland in accordance with their wishes : Please communicate our support on behalf of the Vierling family . Thank you for your assistance , Kathleen Sandvik 1 of 1 1 / 13/01 8 : 47 Al f January 11 , 2001 Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. Attorneys at Law 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 5 5101 Re : Vierling Farms To whom it may concern: . We live directly across the street from the Vierling farm and definitely do not want to see them gone . Our first reason for wanting to see them re-enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program, is that it is their land, has been in their families for years and they should be the ones to determine what they do with their land. It is a little scary to think that someone can take someone else ' s property from them for any reason . The second reason is we enjoy having a farm across the street from us . It gives us the illusion of living m the country . We will not b able to attend the hearing . Mi ael & Linda Smith 5313 140f St NE Prior Lake, Mn 55372 cc : City of Prior Lake January 11 , 2001 Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. Attorneys at Law 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 5 5101 Re : Vierling Farms To whom it may concern : We live directly across the street from the Vierling farm and definitely do not want to see them gone . Our first reason for wanting to see them re-enrolled in thebeen in Agricultural Preserve. Program, is that it is their land, has their families for years and they should be the ones to d terermuie what they do with their land. It is a little scary to think hat someone can take someone else ' s property from them for any reason. The second reason is we enjoy having a farm across the street from us . It gives us the illusion of living in the country . We will not be able to attend the hearing . Kerry Smith 5299140' St NE Prior Lake , Mn 55372 cc : City of Prior Lake January 11,2001 Planning commission City of Prior Lake Dear Sirs: I have been a resident of 5355 1�� ' St. lti� si:.ce I9b9 . My home is located i22 the First Addition of North Shore Maks. I am unable to attend the Planning Commission meeting on January 15. Since itis implied in the notice that I must be at the meeting to rave zry voice heard I am suuhmitt,Ing my written comments to be read at that meeting If any fiurther son—menus by me arc desired, I am, 17vi11ing to add to them. The property directly across from my house- has been farmed for as long as I have lived Jere, and long before I bought this house. My family has had land in Prior Lake since the 195C ' s. impor The family farm has been an pt part-of Prior Lak , s-history -and still is a positive part of Prior Labe. The recent negµtive attitude shown by the City of Prior Lake toward faring in this rural community is a detriment for the (wality of lLfe_we have as residents -of-Prior'Lake. I support the Z'ierling family in their desire to continue fanning their land. The Planing Commission should amend their Land Use Map to designate their land as Rural Density, Sincerely, Karen I (Koskel_in? Liuey FROM FAX N0 . Jan . 16 2001 10 : 17RM P1 Lot I Partnership c/o Sue Anne Griffith 943 Cemetery Lane Aspen , CO 816114079 (970)544-4633 (970)5444048 FAX January 16, 2001 Prior Lake Planning Commission 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S .E. Prior Lake, MN 55372- 1714 re : Amend Land Use Map to Rural Density Vierling Property Dear Planning Commission. The purpose of this letter is to support the Vierling Family' s request to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for their property to Rural Density. This will enable them to re-enroll V n the Agricultural •Preserve Program . I represent Lot I Partnership, a family partnership with ownership in Meadowlawn (Section 25 Township 115 Range 022 W 1 /2 NW '/4 ), the property directly south of the Vierling' s acreage in the middle , We are surrounded by urban development, both east and west . With so few remaining large tracts of land within the city limits, the need for open space in the form of agricultural lands is a necessity . I urge you to grant this requested amendment , Respectfully submitted, Sue Anne Griffith, Manager Lot I Partnership i � JAN 1 6 2001 ; HAROLD D . BOHLEN 13380 Hickory Avenue Prior Lake, MN 55372 H (952) 445-2828 January 11 , 2001 City of Prior Lake Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator Planning Department 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S. E . Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 Dear Ms Jane Kansier, In regards to the proposed amendment to the City of Prior Lake year 2020 comprehensive plan , for 320 acres of property located in sections 23 & 24, township 115 , range 22 , from the R- HD designation and the C-134 designation to Rural Density . I have no objection to this amendment as this would allow the Viedings to continue to farm of which their family has done for• last 100 years or so. Sincerely , Harold D . Bohlen O� PRIG 4 y U P 1N N E S O� REVISED CITY OF PRIOR LAKE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE YEAR 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 249 TOWNSHIP 115 , RANGE 22 You are hereby notified that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at Prior Lake Fire Station # l , located at 16776 Fish Point Road, SE, on > }estay, iar , 001 at 6 : 30 p .m. , or as soon thereafter as possible . The purpose of the public hearing is to consider a proposal to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map for 320 acres of property located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 in the SE 1/4 of Section 23 and the SW '/4 of Section 24, Township 115 , Range 22. The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density . Legal Description : The Southwest V4 of Section 2, Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota; And The Southeast V4 of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should attend this public hearing . The Planning Commission will accept oral and or written comments ; If you have questions regarding this matter, contact the Prior Lake Planning Department at 447- 9810 . Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator City of Prior Lake Mailed on Friday, January 5 , 2001 . 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\rev mail note. doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372 - 1714 / Ph . (612) 447 -4230 / Fax (612) 4474245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUMTY EMPLOYER January 11 ,2001 Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. Attorneys at Law 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 Re: Vierling Farms To whom it may concern: We live directly across the street from the Vierling farm and definitely do not want to see them gone. Our first reason for wanting to see them re-enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program, is that it is their land, has been in their families for years and they should be the ones to determine what they do with their land . It is a little scary to think that someone can take someone else ' s property from them for any reason. The second reason is we enjoy having a farm across the street from us . It gives us the illusion of living in the country. We will not be able to attend the hearing. W Kerry mith 5299 140'h St NE Prior Lake, Mn 55372 0V , o r l,a9u, January 11 , 2001 c 14 tiV Kelly & Fawcett, P . A. Attorneys at Law 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 Re : Vienmg Farms To whom it may concern : We live directly across the street from the Vierlmg farm and definitely do not want to see them gone . Our first reason for wanting to see them re-enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program, is that it is their land, has been in their families for years and they should be the ones to determine what they do with their land . It is a little scary to think that someone can take someone else ' s property from them for any reason. The second reason is we enjoy having a farm across the street from us . It gives us the illusion of living in the country . 1will not be ffile to attend the hearing . ;1 ael & Linda Smith 5313 140th St NE Prior Lake , Mn 55372 cc : City of Prior Lake s ba O 0 + O �w� N b 41 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VA IN Of O p 0 .w O � °' 0 ; 41,11, 40,10.bip too b4t * 4 - 46604 00 00 n a b :. :::: :: : ::: ::::::::::: ::::::::::::;::: : .. . :41 :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w V q m 0 CD 0 boo ..y po �+ taQ C1 p W W �Q �:��••'��=?'iso'-':�:� :�:'• t+ •••l •••�'�::•-� i'.%'� �''%:�:�:�::�.'•:�:::�i:= ;;�::'t�:�::;�:rx :: P+ 0 c0 `-•`.; M A N N bA E+ 00000000000000000000000000000 mnmw�MNe-oa�oonmuraMN.-omoonmmvMc� NNNIyNNNNNrre—a��T��e—e— �' FQ slim do uasltnx W a 3 Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Address/&%P �,-�x, �-� - Prior Lake , MN Signature �- ► Name: Address : � 7 ' �a • Prior Lake , MN Signature (f r- Name . l/ /V / ravr� v� J Address: � az ?JPrior Lake , MN Signature,-�.a� Name: V \j Address : AW\WV�� 1Off Prior Lake , MN Signature n Name: i tuj� Address :; 1/1 ,41 4; Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address :_ f ` y` t C Z �'�� .� Gi � � � ' �r',� Prior Lake , MN Signature-�=- -.---- = - Name: �� . �c Address : Ll 60 v� �• � ,� l ' Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes , l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address: I14 1 CS W l rY1 r ' Prior Lake , MN Signature �- �-- - -- Name : Address : Vw,\ Wlnk J ' Prior Lake , MN Signature p Name: �: - �f!� i �1�.� I � l;� C Address * S � Prior Lake , MN 1 Signature ` Name: 6N1 W tv Address • � ` } �a4 , ' �► * Mor Lake , MN r Signature � N _ _ Name: Li i \ \ Prior Lane , MN Address * , 1 =ti ,� ,� � , F Signature V ^ ". , Name : I/ ew t • Address : � r� t v � i c ' i . V Prior Lake , MN J ✓ r') f Signature f Name: `� 1L � Address : > � ` - e 12 Prior Lake , MN Signatur Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name ' \Lv�Y� Address : L �� 1� i Prior Lake , MN `J Signature Name: amu, 2 Address : 7 / Prior Lake , MN Signatur _ r U � Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Sign Name: Addre �� � ` Prior ke , MN Signat - - Name: � �y � �►.; t rM��" `► Address : � OuJF I ( i kP6?) XC) TP� KAF, Prior Lake , MN Signature L=- Ndme . Address : �:' `{ '�J i .1 c Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: too Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature 6 . f Yes, 1 support the Vieriing Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Address: W Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: ' es Address : `� �0 "'1 �► ; �� b' r� r Prior Lake , MN Signature lC Name: N�� Address : I "7 's 1� 1 r - ,n � � r� Prior Lake , MN Signature�r- Name : Address : 4 [-�1 '-� � „�•�=, � \+r' Prior Lane , MN Signature - cu Name: Address : l 7 Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : �� � � � "- �. _ t , � n 3141 �'t �� '�� Prior Lake , MN Address :� � Olt Signature s Name: Address : 1 � ' h / ^ o' IM ILC Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, I support the Vierling Family In their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Q it t i e q3c Address : �0 Priar Lake , MN Signatu Name . 61-01) rr la � Addresses ����� b/�L,P� Prior Lake , MN v Signature Name: Nql(tr � � 35 Address : Prior Lake , MN Sig nature Name: Y `� Virt ' e= Address : y3 � s ' ' 'x �� Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : q � � Prior Lane , MN Signatu Name : o7 + � —' ' c : � l �ly CA11 - T Address :, ( � 7' 'C �1 c Prior Lake , MN SignaturIFe Na211 me : _ _• , , ` e ! 4 !3 c Address : f- 4 , rt � Prior Lake , MN Signature ;- .: Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Address : 1 Z. 5 � ' -� � � = ~ f= Prior Lake , MN c� Signature 11 Name . �. Address : 1 ' ._ Prior Lake , MN n Sig �atur + Name: ' ` r ' ; ' '' l Address : /`, Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN 19 1 F 34 Signature NamI LF e: - Address : -'�' '` , Prior Lake , MN Signature ` s Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature - - ' `` Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : . - .-- Address : i � . I - � Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: i } Address : r "� _ Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : ' Pnoor Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : -Prior Late , MN Signature r .! Name: Address : Prior Late , MN Signature I f/ l i j Name: - Prior Late , MN Address . Signature Name. Address : Prior Late , MN Signature Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian : Name : ; E �_ Address : - Prior Lake , MN Signature t Name: Address . I ell , , Prior Lake ,Lane , MN Signature ow oll Name: :. address : l � . " �` ' ' Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: , Address . or l,4 1 r I A IPrior Lake , MN Signature 's of Name: '0I low _ Address : ' Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address . Prior Lane, MN Signature Name: love Address . � e � Prior Lake , MN Signature11 MIMI r Yes, 1 support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : �� Address . Prior Lake, MN Signatv �:/ \ �-v� Name: Address . �� ,(' ' � � � ' -,''�' I �..- Prior Lake , MN Signature r' Address : L 5 `� Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address * o �� Prior Lake , MN Signatur r Name: Address-I 1 •� 1 'Bro (�)eh Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: nil{ Address : Q � G� Prior Lake , MN Signatur Name: l S �� er�� address : h� �JC , f .. Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address : � �2 Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: --T Address : HS37 Surrer L „ , Prior Lake , MN Signature* ignature etlE- gj � Name: k 4c, o Ce, C Address . 413 V d fox 4� L/ Prior Lake , MN Signaturafoo� Av�� J, Name:_, (;Y�1 f61.3decAc c1l Address : � � O( x ' rias Prior Lake , MN Signature �- Name: Address : rX Ct Prior Lake , MN SignatureLZLVVLbCA ' Okzcj' llQ'`� Name. V ( GI Address : Prior Lake , MN SignatureDzvkA ; p' Name: ' Uv Address : �5 ? .5 C cs' �, , ,�k rT Prior Lake , MN Signature a Yes, 1 support the Vierling Family In their request to change the designation of their land in the 3020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : A17 Z6 � IN Address: S 7s " , vGclilJd ST" /V 4 � Prior Lake , MN Signatu Name:STF� l ' I T Address : go7l Offfd:(M/fW— _ Prior Lake , MN 2 Signature L Name : Address : tO Coir- Prior Lake , MN Signature A6U4w 621 x nrO Name : Ao I '15 Address : L Prior Lake , MN Signature Address : L (J Prior Lake , MN wVV Signature Name : Address : �? Prior Lake , MN Signature4 ZC Name: ' Address : � � !'TSI- L Prior Lake , MN Signat ure l Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Ill MICa, Address : ( C� � S-�� u � � /y Prior Lake , MN Signature Name. 1 Address : Atm ` c /4-� 47 CE Prior Lake , MN Signature t - Name: Address : L� � � Jul f� _ Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address .T %K C . 1 ' Prior Lake , MN Signsfuj e Name: [ hrt-5s Address : L 1 " Prior Lake , MN Signature 4 Name . f'� Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : ' ►��� �c� � P nsP �� Address & � c � Gam- Prior Lake , MN Signature C% L � Yes, l support the Vieriing Family in their request to change the 2 designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian : Name : lawnu nam" ' m Address: ICAPrior Lake , NDN Signatu Name: � � � � � � a 1 c) or�. � Address : L� C c Wa OA I ( ( , Pnor Lake , MN S Signature _` Name: rnlapr /j�z�o Address: © AX-4 .4AV Qf G� v� Prior Lake, NDN Signature _, Name: Address :, I qi5i &c itx. . Prior Lake , MN Signature AA�l Name: C; Address: 6 Prior Lake, MN � Signature Name: jea,4AV) Lb Wrt G l4r Address :_ `ts91 f 0 UO (90cl Prior Lake, MN Signature -� Name: Address: 1 S� E . Prior Lake , MN Signature �1 �✓ C s h V ierlin Family In their request to than a the Yes, u e g Y 9 p designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan . Name Address: Prior Lake , Mei Signat Name:ure2c Address . c� oPrior Lake , Mid Signatv ek u �CG.y� Name: Address: ' / Prior Lake, MN Signaturek � Name: a j��� a� Address : 55q Q>Cos arc. 5�- Prior Lake , MSV Signature2:� h Name: v L (kite address: `G + bih V c � Tv Prior Lake, MN Signature V` Name : Address : S�Y Prior Lake, MN Signature �ti� ' Name: del � Address : 50 �� tCe hi Prior Lake , MSV S- ig naterl Yes, l support the Vieriing family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name: zr Address: (,/) 14 L 1 a -Clt S E Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: .,,,,L- 0( w. 4Jc e. � Address : 6 '91( 4ZLEv4 4 �L Prior Lake , MN Signature Name' Get' L P)Oj LI k/ Address: LA � Prior Lake, MN \ Signature Wig Name. �`t Address : ` i Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address : - L �) Prior Lake, MN Signatv u p .Nam Address : I � )L Sib Prior Lake, MN Si natu , 9 Name. t /� 1 �1 Address : 3 113 Ln lel C Prior Lake , MN Signature i . Yes, 1 sup pormt he 14in Family In their request to change the designation of their and in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address: 27`cr /at �GD ° Prior Lake, MN Signature - `Name : Address : � v �- Prior Lake , MN Signature XName: vye�7Le I'V► L � Address: 4% )' d Q -` Prior Lake, MN •x, Signature WQ x Name: Address : WS Prior Lake , MN XSignature ANarne: �, Address :' t S � SI.-� `� e Prior Lake, MN Signature -- - Name : Address : `� Prior Lake , MN _ � .. , Signatur Name -- ' Address : n c` _ Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, l support the Vierling family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian : - - - - war I Name . CA ks n , Address: 63-2 `1l C��rl Prior Lake , NDN Signature SO (ak Onjci()�Q 1:4±'C Name. Address. ( C C Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address: 3 / ,7(/ Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: L. Address : S S � Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: � ' Z Address : � Prior Latce, MN Signature p Name :Address : 7 1160 t �2 S � s� Prior Lake , MN Signat Name: _ Address : ' Prior Lake , MN Signature 1 Yes l support the "ViAin Famil in eq uest do change th . Pp 9 Y eq 9 e designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : WA Address . 17W6 Pnor Luke , MN so rgnature Name: Address: 7VI Prior Lake , MN Signature Name. c � Address: d Prior Lake, MN Signature � r Name: D c,' Address : Prior Lake , MIN Signature pct Name: Address : �Rr 1 C)Di CLPrior Lake , MN Signature'`- �- Name . e ci 7 1 Address : � ) ���• Prior Lake , MN Signature / Address : I � a s � av�c Prior Lake , NDN Signature -- Yes, t support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Name : y 1 ' r Address: ) l� iA C,Y4DYI.4 � S I ✓ l Prior Lake , MN )<...S'rgnature Name: Address: 1 i L1 [� r .Prior Lake , MN XSignatu X Name: Address:zf9 Z �.�� lrf0Lk �rior Lake. Nits X Signature ft ° )C Name: `(� �� S 1 ry\ Address : � ( 00UiLO -E� Prior Lake , MN Yg Si nature T : A 00ei j f't e7 Name: f I Address : .. � Z , ►r Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address : qP (G Prior Lake, MN Signature V Name: 1LAKIft Address : 141 t - Prior Lake , MN Signature M Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name: Address: Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address: l G 9 k LrL4 Prior Lake , MN Signat Name. \\ AddresA5 7 ILPrior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: 0 ��lee Address : LIZ ��/ �� S� Prior Lake, MN Signature Name .. Addresse 5 C 1 r - Prior Lake, MN Signatur Name. Address : �f � � L -Prior Lake , MN Signature P f4i, 9E l A 19vi k) 9 Yes, 1 support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name: Address: C)�,O qc�- ( Priar Lake, MN Signature i Nli ame: / l��i � - -�� � Address : �,� �OM Prior Lake , MN SignatureO ` Cti Name: address: S t'a¢ j I I Ca- I Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: A1191 e 0 141A Address : o V Prior Lake , MN Signature Name, p Address :. Y5 to �� J t!� Jk .- Prior Lake, MN Signature Name : �l V1 l /ic �� Y� Address : " l I7U � Prior Lake, MN c Signature Name: I A Andress : L 3 6 h"` �-� n �'✓� Prior Lake , MN Signature ✓ m4E1 k 6E j Yes, t support the Vterling Family in their request to change the designati n of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan: Name : Address: Prior Lake , MN So natu Name: M � Address : MM � Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address: Prior Lake, MN Signature_ Name •:� iL � � Address :5 � 3 �,(,� f'yt.i'r� r S'� Prior Lake, MN Signature �i � � % Address : qyq r �' Prior Lake, MN Signature L1 I c 17 V Name : fZuc/c c ' �% ✓/<'vc Address :Y �.�eeletrz.,ZDGZ ST � Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: go tq Address : C Prior Lake , MN Signature KIM 9r 1 Yes, 1 support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian : Name . ��� � Address: Prior Lake , MN so gnature Name: � � P\ tJ a ry Address : i' � ( --o 1 � kc o pAopii . MN Signatura hi, 1 Address: gQQAOeD ( (Q `+ ) SE7 Prior Lake, MN Signature N arne: L 1, � 4 ul ve� Address: q / -�� Prior Lade , MN Signature - AV yL �I '/)A Nam Address : , �� L "" �Lr- �-� Prirortuk�-NIN Signat re - Name: . . Address : Signature Name : Address: 5 � ��� � � �r � � � n `� ' Prior Lake , MN Signature i4oe� I I s the vie In Fame in their request to change the . Yes, support g iy q 9 designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian : Address. (�y �hcorf Al S _Prior Lake , MN Si'gnature�^ Name:/ �� '` � 2 - Address: % �a✓1 Ave t � � Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: / /i Address: Z S �- Prior Lake, MN Signature; Name . Address : U /� 7 J/' Prior Lake , MN SignatuFe4 ZN Name'. Address : ' !t V, [ 161 Prior Lake, MN Signature �- Name : Ll Address : � f > Prior Lake, MN Signature 1 � Name: Address : � � U l` Z %�� �� 132c �. _Pnor Lake , NDN Signature f • rnifir `l'r est to chan Yes, l su theVem� �n��ie a the g designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : �/l�/� u E 7� l � Address:/) 45 S,c lick / � J r Prior Lake , MN SofgnatU42a (eooer eWzl z=&:!r4 Name: ��� /4-7 Li rR Address : 'D �� Prior Lake , MN Signature 71 Name: . Address: Prior Lake, NDN 171 Signature Name: kill Address * 5 � ML 61 4) Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: � ` i Gt .v'L Cl V Address : �v o7 �^v / Prior Lake, NDN Signature Name: GNU t " Address : �1jtjX1Xt ' 5rior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address : l `f 7a S � � ►� C ( Prior Loke , lvtN `�-� Signature i Yes, l support the aling arrilly in err uest to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan . rVI Name: Address: 11 / ' � ' ICLY Prior Lake , MN Signature 2 Name:� ALL ( Address • 56 f to C5 L SJ Prior Lake , NDN Signature ELk L Nam & r Address: � Q . Prior Lake, NDN Signature ' Name: Ke, I rASe- � re Address : 3s a ww r' Wet.44"4w000priar Lake , MN Signature Nam Le Address : � Q � ��� ��`' � � Prior Lake, MN Signature;" re Name: J S. Z- Address : c> c� c r' r c � i -fdar Lake, MN Signature r �� Name: ti Address : l 04, �� '� ,` ` C `�� S ; Prior Lake , MN Signature � r� Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request fo change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian : Name : I L Address: 2 Lklial Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: v : � ! " vi 14 77 Address: / t / Prior Lake , MN Signature "v Name: G— ' ' ' �� y Prior Lake, MN Address: Signature Z �� Name: Address : } "' l `1 ; 1�c z l�if 1 Prier Lade , MN r Signaturer f f Name: '�- z - ` 4 �rioT Lake, MN Address . > �� 7 Signature IeA =- f Narrie: ` C Address: Prior Lake , MN Signature . I - - Name . Address : � t �(.: JO . .& , . Prior Lake , MN Signature -- Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name: tiC' LD .� k`� � 5 Address: js ( - V t Vy Prior Lake , NDN -�\ Sig natureL� t Name: J ' !inc A , � A 1°'1 Address : '� ' 1 1 ` ( T. �. . '� S Prior Lake , NDN Signature Name: Address: � ' �' �`� C � 1 VC `s Prior Lake, MN f Si nature Name: Address: _ Prior Lake , NDN `� Signature )C K- Name . / Address : zPrir1r Sig nature Address : Prior Lake, NDN Signature n' AAj Name: Address : % . �`� Prior Lake , MN Signature fv Yes, 1 support the Vierling family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address: 4 �� � �� (ZA N< 1Prior Lake , MN Signatu =f Name: Address : r< � Prior Lake , MN Signature � — Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : 11 MINIM Wool Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Late , MN Signature Vierling Amendment to Comprehensive Plan This is a proposal submitted by the Vierlings to amend the Comprehensive Plan from the current R- HD and & BO designs ions o urs ensi y The proposal includes 320 acres located on the north side of CSAH 42 , west of Pike Lake Trail and east of CSAH 18 . City of Prior Lake Comprehensive Land Use Plan De grata an Use 0twai� DEW ED Ov r o. F. C A2 p „ mW Nii;DA.A.< rjto ® :. = rn...I w<veml oPor`a Er . <.. o � September 14, 2000 The west 160 acres of the property is designated for R-HD The east 160 acres is designated for C-BO The property is presently zoned Agriculture and is used for agricultural purposes 2 Petitioner 's Rationale * Amendment is necessary to continue farming * Tax advantages of Agricultural Preserve Program * Protection from eminent domain * Current designation is incorrect because the City is unprepared to develop this site * Lack of utilities and access * Protection of natural environment and open space In their testimony, the petitioners and the petitioners ' representatives offered a variety of reasons for this amendment . The following slides attempt to respond to these rationale . YVlog 4 -o., bl d,iS (Y16jPCY%,O fr oUok 4-o ` aft 6LOI 3 Continued Farming Operation + The Agricultural Preserve Program is not necessary to continue the farming operation * The property is presently zoned Agricultural * The City does not anticipate a change of the zoning on this site * The petitioners can continue farming until they choose to sell or develop property Stress that property is still zoned agricultural . The City has no plans to change this zoning . 4 Tax Analysis * According to Leroy Arnoldi , Director of Taxation , Scott County, as long as the property is used for farming , it will continue to qualify for the most beneficial property tax treatment possible, which is agricultural . Under this classification , the property is valued lower, i . e . as agricultural rather than residential or commercial , and the tax applied against the property is minimized . " Taxes are based on the use of the property, not the Zoning or the Comprehensive Plan designation. 5 Tax Analysis for Vierling Property Residential Homestead $ 127 , 244 Agricultural Homestead $ �7 _ 1 Agricultural Green Acres $ ' Agricultural Ag Preserve $ �� 4, 522 - Agricultural Preserve allows a credit of $ 1 . 50 per acre . The total difference in taxes between Green Acres and Agricultural Preserve on this 320 acres is $468 . J4 4CYYM�r 6 Protection from Eminent Domain * The Agricultural Preserve program does not prevent the use of eminent domain * The program requires an additional step in the process for acquisition of more than 10 acres * The City does not contemplate eminent domain proceedings on this property . In order to use eminent domain on more than 10 acres of property in the Ag preserve program, there must be a hearing before the EQB . The City has no plans for this site ; e . g, no public improvement projects or other use that requires the use of eminent domain. 7 The City is not prepared to develop this site * The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to identify future land uses * The plan also identifies potential road connections and services * The specific development of the site is reviewed at the time the property is developed The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to provide landowners , both current and future, with an idea of the potential uses on a site . The Plan also enables the City to make long range plans for public services , such as sewer, water, parks , and so on . The plan is not intended to provided specific development plans for individual properties , or identify a specific timeline for development . 8 Lack of Uti I ities and Access * Trunk water mains and trunk sanitary sewer mains are located in CSAH 42 , directly in front of this property and can be extended to serve this property * CSAH 42 is a 4- lane highway, classified as an arterial street, and is projected to accommodate up to 27 , 000 ADT by 2020 * CSAH 18 is classified as a minor arterial street and is projected to accommodate up to 7 , 500 ADT by 2020 9 Protection of Natural Environment and Open Space * The City is able to exercise more environmental control when the property is developed under the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance regulations than as agricultural land * Open space requirements in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances include parkland dedication requirements and limits on floor area and lot coverage 10 Criteria for Agricultural Preserve # 40 acre minimum * The property must be designated for Agricultural Uses on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map # The property must be zoned for agriculture with a maximum density of 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres * The property must be farmed and managed according to sound soil and water conservation district practices The Ag preserve program was established in 1980 to preserve long-term agricultural uses in the Metro area. Once enrolled in the program, the property remains in the program until the owner initiates removal, and then the property remains as Ag preserve for 8 years . The City may initiate expiration if the Comprehensive Plan is amended. This property was enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program in 1983 . In March 1993 , the property owner filed to remove the east 160 acres from the program, effective March 3 , 2001 . In December 1993 , the property owner initiated the removal of the east 80 acres of the west 160 acres from Ag Preserve, effective December 31 , 2001 . The west 80 acres remains in Ag preserve . Enrollment in this program does not prevent the City or other agency from enforcing environmental laws or other provisions . It does prevent the City from enforcing or enacting ordinances or regulations which would unreasonably restrict or regulate normal farm operations , unless it bears an immediate or substantial threat to public health safety and welfare . 11 When Eligibility Ends ( MN Statutes 473H . 04 , Subd . 2 ) #"when the comprehensive plan and zoning for the land have been amended so that the land is no longer planned for for long term agricultural use and is no longer zoned for long term agricultural use , evidenced by a maximum residential density permitting more than one unit per 40 acres " In 2000 , the petitioners asked the City to approve reenrollment of this property in the Ag Preserve program . The City refused on the basis it no longer met the statutory requirements . 12 Issues \/v&\/ The issue is not whether this property should be enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program , but whether the Comprehensive Plan should be amended . *The petitioner bears the burden of proof for amending the Comprehensive Plan . The issue here is not enrollment in the agricultural preserve program or even if the owners can continue to farm, but whether the long term plan for this property is appropriately changed to Rural Density . The Vierlings can continue to farm this property without amending the plan. 13 Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan MN Statutes 462 . 352 define a comprehensive plan as a compilation of policy statements, goals, standards, and maps for guiding the physical , social and economic development, both private and public, of the municipality and its environs" * There is no specific criteria included in the statute for the amendment of the comprehensive plan . * The City's Comprehensive Plan established goals and criteria by which to review a proposed amendment . 14 2020 Comprehensive Plan Criteria for Amendments * Applicable Goals and Objectives listed in the Comprehensive Plan * Purpose of the proposed designation * Development Location Criteria for proposed designation The goals and objectives applicable to this proposal include the Suitable Housing and Environment Goals and the Economic oals . V1 f6d '+ 15 Goals and Objectives * Suitable Housing and Environment - Encourage the development of suitable housing in a desirable environment by : . Providing opportunities for a variety of high quality housing types . Maintain a choice of and encourage development of quality residential environments 16 Goals and Objectives * Economic Vitality - Pursue a prudent use of available resources and the optimum functioning of economic systems by : . Striving for a balance of commerce, industry and population . Encouraging a diversified economic base and a broad range of employment opportunities . Promoting sound land use 17 Rural Density Designation Q Purpose . A special classification for areas where urban services are unavailable . Preserve large tracts of land for future development . Recognizes the eventual development of land Q Development Location Criteria . Land where public sanitary sewer is unavailable Comprehensive Plan amendments are also reviewed based on the purpose and development location criteria of the proposed designation . The area near Howard Lake on the west side of the City is the only area meeting this criteria . This area is p4Rned=ferRural Density . 18 Rationale for Staff Recommendation O The Rural Density classification is intended for areas where municipal services such as sewer and water are not currently available and will not be available until at least 2020 . This land does not meet that criteria . O The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to provide for orderly growth of the community . . It provides current and future residents with an idea of what types of uses will eventually be developed , and how the City will look in the long term . . It allows the City and other providers the opportunity to plan for public services . The R- HD and C- BO designations best describe the ultimate land use . O There has not been a material change in the area or conditions affecting this site since these properties were originally designated for R- HD and & BO in 1995 . O Maintaining the current designation does not preclude the continued farming operation until the Vierlings choose to sell or develop the property . �o `kms 19 Original surveys and drawings o � O :a £ c c O � L N da cE •�> Cc Z cg m P 1 -M = i _ vJ (� z Q Q a� CJ t5 > N L -8` - 66 zp O O O �CCn �pC •� fQ m J = U� `/� U 2 a�ffi (n0 N � ii E 7C) E � � � :? 3 � a ' � :6 � » � � L Q It --- �'4\tivv 'iv 244• Lativ vk kv v 0 cuW i 0 . � 0 y ..:.. .. r. . tiJ >. .. yi v- C . U .� y.:i : . me k: q r: :4 \ y i:: : Location Map iL TM � ._. Location of Property IIA � 4 ! C2 H / IL Cil Ir \ F 'eWulf 0 IF t` N 1000 0 1000 Feet A CD3 � . CD O0i ; � z C� O to to to � ❑ O (D DO ® a 11 ❑s I Epps - d ® ❑4444 . . . . . : : : . . . :. . ::. :. . . .. . . :. . . . . ::. . . . . . . . . :. . . . . . .;.. . . . . . .: 4444 . . :. . . .: .:: 4: 444 . . . . . . .. ® , ( o s BEA 1 � s: e111►�� s� _ ► � �� 111111111■ - CC 1D � !111/111111111 " � \ll ' �� X11■■■� i ��i � �� ■r�j� X711 �� ■ �� �LL � � �11��11IP�� iii ►I ����i � t ■111i •� �; �� �� � Illllllli� ^� X1111 Pot - JRL r— tiumILUN L)R �� �� �� W �E � ! J JACKSON TR , SHA KOPEE Z Z 1413 C C ` } 2• 23 24 ST . T115N R22W 117 1 w l o C 8 TlllT' R , , • 115 ■ i i f f . 1 . ■ . f . . ■ i . 1 i i ski i f /� l i . � i i i� i . i i � � � � �. \� M 77ps logo f ii . f iif . if . si . i : if * f 11.1 /17 ■ I ! � ■ CC ■ w /IO T115N T115N R22W R22W R21W ' 24I 19 or � } 22 23 � ■ z � } 2726 4 (0 25 30 18 240th ST . 42 w w uj CEDARWOOD ST a �, ' • HILLS > HAMPTON ST . >� C > G ©� I �1� eC �f < �� w J 4 . 6 . o� ID �r1 � . vi ■ j FO Q �. �8 P R BIRD q�, a a o 7 , Q 59 co ir Q Q BIRO Q �~� o Lij tr q �- �� 7'R. ��' Q uj " 2 PEA 57 . i 4. LLS 0 I `� CT . CL SFq � GE KILL PK WY . WOOD G P PKWY . , CA AGE p ��� AVE• cI,Q < < Q # i . M , sf . i . . f . fi . fff . f TR * l4 106 Q ILL = , /06 SHORE �� > CARRIAGE LO • 4 OX HUNT c� c a HEMLOCK tp yp . CT . cr �- • w 'NAM 8L , • cn m _ ,c • r . ,. �z- cr en ./ `;`, RI ITTFRFIELD . . I�CIR . . . C . S .A . N . 42 UTILITY CROSSINGS ( EERNDALE AVE . AND CREST AVE . ) S 1 /4 COP. SEC 24 •� TI15N - R22W INP CIM CO r 24 = ■■{! Porte 1 Leo & Mdea V:ering (A 17 00 U I 7 ' I r I 4 SAN - MH- 2 PROPOSED STORM SEWER 50 Ob, Do- (SEE S.A.P. 70-642- 07) I j TOP 965.00 PROPOSED BITUMINOUS BIKEWAY INV- 955.80 ° - 12' PLUG aP I cB - - e. J _ 142 L. F. 8" PVC ® 0. 40% - - PROPOSED CONC. CURB & GUTTER - - C . S. A. H . 4Z FF - T-- - - - - 16 -- – D7 2 – �— – Y - - � � �56166 1. F. 12" CLASS 51 D- LP. B . ° � I I c6 7 HYDRANT, 6- VALVE, 2 LF, 6" CLASS 52 D.LP_ & 12'76" TEE /33 ' WATERMAIN WITH 8. O' MIN - COVER 5 • -- -- CB- 1 • � B 1111 = 31111 = 3 illl ; ! : 11 E - - - --- HYDRANT, 6" VALVE, 2 LF. 6 �_ _ T - BUR - [' CLASS 5 DJ.P. & 12"X6" TEE + - R 0 IEE- 2 INL-Ei_ iL --- 7 ' • ✓ TEE--NG d- G 4" 33-00' CB 23 I B 04 Y - -- 70.00' �� I ) I _ I g <. [ 75-oo�' , 2 —� OUTLET- 2 ; / . g --- r1 3 --- ` Fera N _ --- 12"X.1Y CROSS WITH - - - �' 12" D y ,)-( - 1 r �12" V/�LVE ,z"xs' REDucER To -- j -- L. , n 296 ; SOUTH AND 12' PLUG I 12 5' BEND ) �r REMOVE EX 12" PLUG, NECT I OI- 3A AN . MH -1 1 / i $ Y _ Fence $3 12" VALVE & EXTEND SHOWN Lj TO NORTH & WEST 965.75 II ( Ih r � J ) Coiner - Q I INPL� CE STORK 41 23 I v! � ' I I e+J't�6d ^ ! /� SELR INLET 140 S.Y. STREET Tk ePAaae ,f� / ' In I I RESTORATION REOb, I > JI LijLJ Par 11 ! rrkFy1� 7 City ee P a Ln e STRAIGHT LINE CUT $form t -- -L—J 1 scoff o. & w I ` I TACK & MATCH IX > ' ) Tory & .teao xorea xa:td.. .a,a..:10 .to..e-+ Fie9Rry & cyllh:o r4o..aaa & Liao st tare ' N Stott & ea„aoce A,.,.N: M - < ' Gods I _ z Bald.c U r_ BITUMINOUS Ylr ' Foshett o k RagN2 1Ed od R- & Reaee 5 Dow" Gude Pncd 7 Puce' is KodwN i Porcei 10 I Parcel 12 [ Parcel 13 Pacei Ia Po ed 9 I Q 1 I .i 6R5 Porcd . 4 I Ahrat.00s (ED) _ Porcd 3 i & 1K1e uj Porcd 5 Parcel 6 I 1 15.00• I FUTURE 8 SAN[ ARY SEWER 0 0- 4071 I 1014 LF. 12 - LASS 51 D.LP. .� y ; Q WATERMAIN WI 8.0' MIN. COVE o i i Z - 182 LF. 8 LASS 52 D_LP. HYDRANT, 6" VALVE, 15 LF. I6" CLASS 52 D.1_P. c 12"X6" TEE w WATERMAIN TH 8. 0' MIN_ C04R I I I i z w I / 10.00 I Ex 9 VALVE I I EX . INV. 954- 34 ( VERIFY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF SAN. MH - 1 k MH- 2 ) 1 I � EX. 8 WATERMAIN v I q REMOVE IX 8" LUG, CONNECT 8- D.I.P.. I AND EXTEND A� SHOWN ! EX. 8� SANITARY - \ I .. -- — ' ra SEWER O 0407. I s1m I 7 EX. SA' - ' iDP 974. 72 ! / INV- 553.50 I NOTES: I ENGINEER SHALL VE10FY INVERT �V- �• ' ! / PR1oR To coNsTRudnoN VERIFY MANHOLE TOPS, INVERTS, do FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS_ PRIOR TO UTILITY CONSTRUCTION . I HAMPTON , ST. STORM SEWER LOCATIONS MAY BE INCORRECT_ b =--v — (SEE S. A.P. 70- 642- 07 STORM SEWER PLANS) GRAPHIC SCALE ` 1 MAINTAIN 18" MIN , VERTICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN STORM SEWER & WATERMAIN. - - - -- - _ ( h 7T50 It ) i RECORD PL N SEPTEMBER 1995 DATE OESCRIPTfON DESICNEe _ CITY OF PRIOR LAKE NEiREr aR,IEr THAT `MIs PUN- S=EfX1� a'>0'� N I DRAWN GGTim CITY PROJECT NO. 93- 07 aF P.", ..S PREPARED B. NE a UNDER N- DiREC / / •ICONSUL TING ENGINEERS � �— DRAYRR GG S,wERVIvoN .ND TNni 1 .N . wL1 �edsiEREc S.A. H_ - 42 SANITARY SEWER & WATERMAIN CROSSINGS SUPCR SMAC ND) PIA P Am A >M L EQ Or THE u` GR APNiC SCALE ,ia < a � I MaleT Sfe'1" BCf & aSs( CiateS inc .nC . sI— -. __ D HORIz- s EERNDALE AVE. & CREST AVE. 1959 SLOAN PLACE (612) 774- 602' ST PAUL MwNESDTa 55: 17 0 J 5 OA TL MAY 1093 SHEET .J- OF SHEETS PRG'JAC ? NO 102 - 007 D�,F t/9/ .'3 reE� No. —. 1380C SRELAKD PARKWAY 612 546- 0432 MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55647 1 PL007 — t . � I � ; L . *I I > IIIK i I 7�7 i 141 IT 1i CS� H 42 —r-I— ... ----- s It ` YD N ALVE A. I ` Y 13'X6' LEAD F, 12'X6" TEE r ,` 1`4 `� . . ? 12' PLUG Nff _ a . y y ',�. i I . ✓' `: ' u. : �rT , i % 1 &I-LT2 ml,aLIF >;90 - - - - - - - - - - -- --- - -- -- - - - - L III , i _-- _- - --- -s— �-r Y - _ _ - - _ _ -_ _ N.Pr t ,LLL - -- - �r - - - -- — - ' I �_ J1 Sh_4 L —_ - - y LL, , —i f � LLLLrLLrLLLLALLLLLLLLpLLLLLLL�,,L_ LL -�LY -~LLLLLL-LLLLLLLL,L,LL� . . _ _— — _ /� — _ _ __.- -_ ._. _ — ya 185+ r ,i : : - ..._ _ t 04 �_. �• -- --- — — _— _ _ _ _ _— — — — — _-__ —_ — 1 824 5: .- L. - LLL'L16"X12"RFDUCf3i r r}3 Ja of ,. Y _.. ^ MH3 _ - MH4 } '� Y * — _ MH�s- 16" PLUG 1 --;.-- I 1 1 I .,_ r 12' BF VAL �- 0' -� LIL;LZy - - - is - - — ;� %'LL,. LN L, x t 16"X16'CROSS 2 ; i j 16' PLUG 1 \ ^=-r*� , 1 h ` �' 4 t T LL' / ^}> i I �.., Z t Z .y XI ,r-•-. ,-, - LLL . ,-, t % , 1, i ;/ t"L ru_uw 2 ; r ,' tom` -- HYD w/VALVE c i 0'-8' PVC SDR35 ® 0.402 18 -8" LEAD 40'-8" PVC �R35 0 0. 4 i �, ': `: Y V40'-8' PVC SDR35 ® 0- 407 r ' jp ` J i [ 7880.26 INV WITH PLUG � q d / 4II �1 .i L r 4 \ 1189+90 90 RT n 16`X8" TEE 859.80 INV WITH PLUG `; -w` � • 867.14 INV WITH PLUG ± { ': ? A 4 i is B M . ELEV. = 852 47 I / :w r w�Iiw =LtLit i s' or DATUM = N.G.V.D. (1929 ADJ.) z i . ? ,, ,. " ' - �^ , ` r !: , :,, lt`zt SPIKE IN PPO i € e ` J � ti ' ILL +j J I'' STA 183+79 63' LT } i 4 -- -. ,', 1 ' II j ' ` , Y Li. I I IL LLLL, K I `�. _ . . ....._. __.. . --. ... . _.. - ..... _ . _ _ . . . -t. ... _. . — _. — - -- - __ -- �— _ r. -- - -- -. . _ ..... - _ -- . - _ _ _ i _.. ...... _. _._ . . _._ __ .. L' LL _ _.. _ . . . . :: : � _ - .. ..... I _. _. - - h _.. .. ._. . . . .. ........ ..._. .... ... _......: ...__.. .... . .. _.. 910 __.. - . _ . . - - 910 _ ._ _. _. . _ _. LLLLLLLLLLL� . . .... _ .. . 1. _ . . LLLLLLLLL I I I _ -1 . _ .- . . - -- - _........ . ...... - — ... - - -- L . ... .. .... - rLrrLrLLrLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL . _. - .. ... .... _ _ . . ._..... . . __ . _ _. ... ._. ._. _ _ . --_ _ .... . .. _ _ . . _ . _ . . . . .1 . _ _ _ _ _ ... ._.._ . . .... . ...._ _ __ . ..... .... ... . _ _ . . . _ . _ . . . ,_ . . 900 _ .__.. _ 900 . ._..... .. .._ ._ .._. .. __. ___ ...... ---.. . .. . ..... . . _ ... _ _- . ..-. . ..... . . ... -- _ __ .. _ ... - .. .._ . .... .... . . _. — TOR 8954 �...._. - -- - -- - _ - -- --- - _... _. 5 LLLLLLLLLLL� _ . . ........ .... -- _._.... _a.... _...-.-..... . . .I......_._.. ......._. .. _...... .... . _... - .. _ - .. ._ . .....F - ..... . . :� . .::: ... - _ . .... ......... -.._ _.. ..... _.. . ._ ___ .. ... . . . .. . .. _.. .. ... _ .... _ _.._. __. ...__. _... . ._. _._ _.. _.__ ..........__ ....._. __.... .. 89Q _ -:� oPosEo _ � __ _ _.._ _ _-- MILE890 -- __..._._.. MA1NiAM j..A&L .... ..._ _ . . _ _.. ._. . _ �. _...... __-7 _... . _ ....... .. . . --.- -.. ....... _ ..... _ - — ... -_. Z __ _.. ._- ._ .._. _ ......... .:_ _.. __ . .... .. _. . ._ .r ._ - -. . .... .__ l - LLLL 880 _ .. - ._ . .. .. '-... _.... -SANtTAR.Y. ... ..._. _.. . . . _ _. — _.. .... _..... _._.... +- - . .. . ffL 880 LLLLrLLLLL . . .. __... _......... .. , - - T3 . GRAr) .&,..LLL..LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL- -- CANt Et�l . .. J,Id . ... - - T _. _ ._.. . 77- _..... _ .. _ F COVER .. .... . __... _ E. _ _ _ . _ _ . 1. _ . _ __ . ..__. _ - _. _. __ _ . __ .. .. . _ 870 _ .-. ........ L. +. . . __ +_.._. .... _ - -- —_ - --- r---- k 870 _ � - — - - LL _-L- __ . -- .. ... . .. .. --- - -- 'FLL-L1. - _ - L LLL z— - i _ } L. _ _. .. _ _ ..... ... .. _........_ ... t I ... . ... F.._ r .... 27 - R6P _ I _._ -r. ......... .... . _... _.`- -- _ sD 26 @ s6s_s2:. w _.. _ 860 ..._.._ T7tr _ --- — _ n E_ _ - - -- _ - 860 _._— LLL I ......._ i - ..__.. - -1 _. _ _ _ .. . ...... _. _ LLLLLLLLrLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL� -- -- - � �Fi:S� - ._ ._....... ..__._ . _ _ _. _ . .. . . .. . . . . . 1 .._. ..._._.. .. 1. _._ . . . . .. __. .. _ . .. . ._ _ . . ... ... ..... _._... ...........-_...._ ._._.__. . _ . I 858-92 ._E;... _.. .._.._. ... -_ _ _ .. t _ : . -- - -- -- --- __ - - L. _t_ _ ___ - . ��— - . . _. _ _ _ . _ _ _ 1 f ..asLss _.. 24. .....Rc __ .. 3s L _. . . ... ...- —i — 850 __ IIII� 850 _.. _ . 1. . . .. .... -._ ..._.-L' _.. .. ._ ..... -- LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL -- _. 37 -- _ _.. _. ._ — — — — ----- - LLLL . . ._..._._- .... ..__._. LL. _...._ _ _—F..... . ..._t 8'X8'7( — __.. _._ — .. .... .. ._. . ._ . .... _.WATER .... CHT. BOO.. _. __. __ — — — _ --- �— Ai IN�B=_ - —1- -- 4 33. . — _.._LLLLLLL ......7 __ . . ._.. -- —a _ __� ..- _. 84Q 84Q _.... _ . 7 - _._ _ _._ . . _ _... .. ._ ... _ _. _ _ _. _... .... x _ LLLL __ 841 -_ ! :'_... 1.... _ s . ..... g r - ----- ---- _ I .. _.. ._ . ... ... .. ... ... _____ F. ............ . LM-___._.... . .._ __._.. _ _.. . .... __ __.-_.... ... __... .-__ d . _. ._ ._. . . ... __ _ . _..... ._...._... .__..-_. ....... .. .... __.. .. _ 1...... _ ........ _. . 1f7 .._. _._ -.. _. p111I 84.1..26_-E _. .__:. �, _ . _..._ ! 830 _ * i ��9 --t 8 _ t — 7 ....... _ t +' +' _.... I :_ 1 4 _.. . ,. _ LATE OESCRIp i :ON DES GINED EE9_ LLLLLLLLLLLLLL 1 _ F _ . . _ H�� LER THAT �s PA .: saEa cAnoN. 1326 ENERGY PARK DRIVE CHECKED CIN OF PRIOR LAKE ... . ii ae T wns PRwAa o ar ME R UY R ur F.um ST. PAUL. MINNE}OTA 55108 CITY PROJECT N0. 95-09 .- .. _- .... t .. i UPERt 9IX: ANU TrIAT 1 Ak A DULY RE TEPID 612 644-4.389 p ( L 1 �RA'�7P1 JA11 - s w SANITARY SEWER A TERM - -- T- -—_ t -� - ?R 7Y.tt �1"'4�` Uti��`ER �A OF � • C S IN '- I ;._. sT o LoN s ; A� SCALE CSAH 42 W A A A ___. ---,----T-- — -�— I � - Is s ®0 S. A. P. 70-642- 10 185+00 TO 197+ 00 4201 -3 - - DAW REcxG. JVYM � �. I IiI 5 OAS JAN. 1997 yy,:E;UTL 3c` 6 SHEETS PROJECT N0, 102-059-20 -_ _ _ ' ' -' i .__ - E. _ Yi 4D I V���RL NG 9 : 'r. : iY ar �, 'N v. - _ ` - - • � 'V _ WAaE Y:£9c ( NS B lt_ ; a. �-alG - ' - •• '� i _ � � �c i . If fifOl .. - - - ~ = _ - _ - i . - / - '] � . ► .. - ( .y\ SOUTH 1: • :-v Y; _ e mom man �/ .i In la mmm _ - - - _ T � f - r loge - '� SEC . : . . a22 52 =mm .mm 44 mIr 97 mmmpm i _ - Q -CHECK DAM 1� ` _ .'� ` c . r - i / - I - D , 1�" S( i•^ ��v( Am mom - -! - • I mm _ ice ' ) 6D - T - � '^ a I L ~� 71 �� , •' \ ! ommm OP Off - ev \ � Q � � - _ ` , . t .._?� Jf � - i - " w2ER _ VA. ' ' ' f HANE (;ABLE �� ` Am ` ]0a ire t - � - , . . •> zC ) ,y PORTER - ' - �• • 1ED 1ElEPI �' > • • - - � ' - 1 \ +' \ T - UR / ! ' icN T . � ;� ( _ 7 - wr . � B -�ST- - \m`- ` 50 TEMP. EASEMENT r "f 1 ;t Y UBT - .w 'Or ' / � �a r mo 0f . 's / IFLEEe Z Z '?o UG 44 VIP "Ims, IV 10 DILI O STUB ' , CUP _ _ OmmIm �- y _ 7 - L'J i / md"OVIVO. 28 WfPL 6 p p, CHI Ir =AA1 OR VIVO Or mml s, mam sm p OF Jam mom Om m ON mm - _ 0mom T - _ _ - O, ` � i ' !vim _ - ` 7 T3 ` _ m' 4 � 1 s 7 PIKE LAKEmum . + � I � �mm 170 T - v 1. - r - � m m", mom �ST-2T �. Im CS(ECK DAY Or VIP 10 - � ]+ITER SURFACE • , �< �� ` 1 ' • -' 1 i ' 7 _ - - ' _ /w . 3 pow 33 _ - Z19. 00 FZ9 1973 - M4T - I _1 _ 1 - _ N tl 24VVw - J' - 7 RCPT 4 LINE _ .. - _-.._ .. . . .:: .,. ,-. . , _ . . . . - - f 7175 N,1R 22W OF SEC � ! �O 1 -;\ 1 C IF ._ _ - . 2� EMP- ` - - O 8-0430 _ m, z! _ ,l mm mar me ? I. 20 +94 . ZS !SURVEY ) _ - A = 19•rPI . Ia + B6- 3 ! SURvEYI RAG GR SHALL CONTACT PUBLIC UTILITIES Y7 \ =.R _C�T7CN CF ALL U'lOERGROUNO WIRES , t`'•� -0� - _Tem + a : 23• SB' S0' __-LES, C_^•:OUITS. P.PESOVAVHOLES, VALVES OR EJJ` Pr. 2. + 12 2e5uHv TI mmj�. ^� ='I 3JR!ED STRUCTURES BEFORE GIGGING. E / E SHALL REPAIR ANY OF THE AaOVE WHICH ARE A : la• I4' 10 ' ��� =E.Y.OVED OR CZMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION ' ` SOUTH Iia CC-K� . w L PAS .T NO �5T TO THE OWNER_ 'o J'.; / r a •4 . 3A a3lcOwsTa1 — �� _ = o 1� ' wits oz 0: n • ]O. 3 f , T • a O2 (•I0.T. Tom] 3,541"fT3T1 , A : • f. 00' �. ifa . S.SL (SOwsiwl • 2- ST O 3 BENOS A . • :3 ' aa- .j 172 . • • S31Ca•f TR) :41423 TO bI +37 � B • 30-3" STA 0 +00 ' : � _ EY 1 1•• • ta3p M (CO6TR1 ZOENO5 + 00 • 30 3 11I (Ba . 33 aJ PCRw3iN1 • ( - - ] T . • AS A• •a • •f > . Pa a91GOff TAI _ = Y. AI w OO • ].] ]Z - rf0 O 6 SEMS � • . w a • •3 . 02 ' 04 —• - L • fO_ / 7 + >aam s • . ]0- 3 . 30.3' Fi4 !N+ w TO 196•20 € SURVEY a ( PIPE \ wE nC• TO Z. 90 • . aY 110 T2a3T 'T2+a3 c . T. SA' L ' 3. b' l ` A.aa� �N\ 70 . \\'a. 2 SENDS 2 SENOS mor iBa+N TO :N+57 : B-/.nro (e7a B3 - / =7 SOUTH �•!E SEC- 21 m,mE SUPVEY \ \ �115N • R \.TO •1�r /•' • T a • TJ : suwvE>P -- ^ aP Z922m 65 ( SVRVEI7 \ (33 P ! I +OOf SUNvEYI- • � 20o . » S.+cows 1 6 + zD • z2 ' le' - S�c _ 3 . 30. w Si OR M_ it .I 3P {I"' • 1 34 70 //jI / P 1. 7+603 ( SURVEY) . _JRVEV/ ` . _ - _ ,{/ 4 .IB •OB' 13' - tt cJRVEY -7 / `N _. S va LINE OF SEC_ 23, TII5% R22w Y I mm3I m% mm -14 smm C: _ — — a _ _ - - t3 - ---_ _ = ME mr 3 - _ _ - ----r— t--- _ — 1 _ _ _ J —._mmmm.I______r ---_ — — mmmm . _ —� _ J ' / 112 SEC •• �� // � J"') /'� /1 _ THIS I APPEAR (N THE SCOTT RECORDS AS ' V J Jv- /�'•y!/ G/L/_/ T}tEY APPEAR W THESCOTT COUNTY 3 OFFICES AFFECTING THE AREA SHOWN THIS DRAWING IS TO BE USED ONLY FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES AND THE 000N- 7Y IS N07 RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY IN - f ACCURACIES HEREIN CONTAINED. if 1i 66 I It O5 4 t NATURAIL oorH4 AIL 3 I t V ER UNG SETAL 4 3 20 6394 5 � 6 7 10 9 14 13 rrrr r t2 11 ` 17 ',.. i oil 12 y B i I OUt I 1 �'- .A.. 2 4 B13 C SD / PAUL GRAFFUNOER L O 197162 '�_-- - 19T369 t a r 197390 14 15 1 �1 u Y 5 V 9 10 1 r \ I / 32 f . GrT /} gr. Lo x 6 _ „- _ - OUTLOT 6 _ ? , . _ _ - DRIVE 3 c roy BLOCK 2 P B 3 4 5 6 7 8 q F 7 0,9 . MAR."DALE a �' y 2 OUTLOT Com` - 3 j r � � 9 � J ` 4 NBLO K 3 � YOUNG MES CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION I \\ I n 1 2 3F OF METROPOLITAN MINNEAPOLIS /[\\ \ 4 m i POND 10 i [ � . er ,J J J0144 R 51WER O! • � � .._— . . 140766 /j/ �� `7 � � /, � `,�9o.J�+��aelr•-w�ccjwc+�._ !� r n � � i % � 543. 40 309. 60 - iti'• - ' J L� CHARLES 7 CRAMER •' - / �' wwN � i 164373 1(fI 65 WILLIAM J. SCHMOKEL COUNTY SURVEYOR. FE 9 . 1989 _ SCOTT COUNTYMINNESOTA NOV. 1982 MAY 1976 / 20 / 72 N 23 - 115 - 22 112 SESs25 T. H5Re22 j i T.'.:3 IS A C `:::1L4TICh DF ACCCB: ' AS 1 .._ r 4r.- _ ll li T:_ SaTT t� L1Y CFF I :. Ai:E :TIf, ; ll:= t'.:A is 13 G _ L:_7 Tf 1: G . T 8Lt]I:A. i _ .1 L.. 1 465. 00 - 600.00 S 33 07 � '"—'r=-� 541•" 9 1 465 .2 160038 r A I if if 240560 - - �a ---- IN JI) 1 V N K � � \ ^ \ ))) t 4 :a" Si6✓iiN1E--lGTfR[R� \ , STEPHEN E5 FRANK KESy�.0-` +--nom'-//�. , ' - - 149845 199642 / '� ( � �4' / �� CHARLES FAV USN \ 1 T ^ 4�yk 214905 I' - - It ' 226084 740. 79 - 199846 IA1 �P '� 9. 98 586 .01 1 1 - _. 400 I , Je3.-� \\ f jBERNARD VIERLING � 160038 1 r ; Let O O STEPHEN KES 214728 � 160038 ST EPNEN KES / 21•T28 ' n „� DAVID BADEN 131709 Q tJ -f (V s92 409.97 FRANK KES V 9J DANIEL SCNERER 122846 199846 .. i o N 252059 -� g •' Y - 432665 LOREN SQUIRES - - Ct� 243824 ✓ �� gy' __ 1 - s+ 31 GORDON 6ENEKE t E1 DANIEL KLAUM 1z5D9a � o JL s . � A --; A 678 .8 251 . 18 274. 41 COUNTY ROAD 42 744.80 400 f 't ' i WILLIAM J. SCNMOKEL COUNTY SURVEYOR FEB 1989 SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA NOV. 1982 - ' - . - - S 23 - 115 - 22 COMPI .. N .f/2 SEC 2 4 T. / / 5 R. 22 THIS I AP EAR IN THE SCOTT CO LINTY i3 THEY APPEAR W TYE SC07T COUNTY OFFICES AFFECTING THE AREA SHOWN THIS DRAWING 13 TO BEUSED ONLY FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES AND THE COUN- 1Y IS NOT RESPONSISLE FOR ANY IN - ACCURACIES HEREIN CONTAINED. HORIZON DRIVE OUTLOT ORfZOq A COUNTY ROAD 16 ►AR2 I HORIZ NH IGHT ' RD 1 2 , , a ° 13 I 'J { 2 11 If - 2 3 p _ Q 249923 ✓ 198768 % ' 12 iJ '{. 163136 1 - — 350. 17 . - • - 110. 17 2 ° ° 7 ° 6 It � If W ~ = 6 C Z Z D HO HEIG S 4TH ADDN z bR/SON _ o � 7 o 10 7 > n 'MALLAGE LINDEMANN - u 177117 y 1 DRIVE �,�• ° AID 7 10 If 12 IS `0 Oq H. +TICKING 194743 n p JAMES FkP;AL1E 1 0 2 193481 1 OUTLOT A X RUN IST AMIN d I GOJ RALPH GOODE ' 198697 . ;>7 n /r 206 .71 � � � , li /t� • 71 0 1`ia''L QE 59 Y 185468 0 1476'15 0 ff 205 .71 -' • SS6 f • . L JAN 1390 PEA i56t WILLIAM d SCHMOKEL ��. 1682 COLNTY S1:RVEYGRr DEC. "17` 5[071 "'OWTT, MINNESOTA JUN[ I: 17 `-4 RAJ` HT7 NIS - 24 1 - 22 -- � // / C�. ' / // T 115 / C '/J� -^J THIS ISA SARIN THE CO TCOUNTY L L G iTf• / . v) / L THEY APPEAR IN THE THE COUNTY L•� (� OFFICES AFFECTING 7HE AREA SHOWN THIS DRAWING IS TO BE USED ONLY FOH REFERENCE PURPOSES AND THE COON - . TY IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY 1N - ACCURACIES HEREIN CONTAINED. • i ' a w N S P CO. EAS ENT o N 1 GOODWIN MA R SHtA LL */a W . W. MARSHALL f WM . MARSHALL 0/0 m COMERON MARSHALL ROY ERICKSON ` 235118 vY 47 1 1 L i RSHALL -_ BERNARD VIERLING - - 160038 .i / 1 2L I on - � a a d U � C52d� JOHN NUGENT 249257 111 T. STENSON E . GREGORY 0. VOSS 203966 205096 233599 ; � . T �.....%' —LE HNERT --� 0340 \O1 ! STEVEN JENKINS 210454 � ' h4 VVV\\\�••/// z rl ' z k j •`L r 3 WILLIAM J. SCHMOKEL _ COUNTY SURVEYOR. SCOTT COUNTY, UMNESOTA FEB 1989 • Nov 1982 , S 24 - 115 - 22 • i 25 T //5 R 22 YLS :S 1V :TJ !3 1C3 g 1+U5,•'E TI. l3 R9i C�T.�sS-T r•.i �iY tJr I - -COUNTY ROAD 42 FI ST AJDIN T 8 1 2 3 4 3 NO TH 1 SH RE dA $ 5 CREST WATER zo 19 18 IT 8 11 14 IS 12 II IO 9 9 T a S 2 D � V a D 4 3 dl TE 3 4 s 1 a 7' 9 C. RAINS 133342 1 " ElNiD AO D ' NTOWER ADVN 2 5 1' q 3 2 f 4 IJ u 4 3 IV 2 ; 33 G u 2 ouzo J it 0. NANSON /'1 ! 12 it 10 A 9 ° 7 2 � I- 9 e 7 6 g 10 I 2 3 1 4 32 ° 1 4 160-123 `f 701 NCRTHI SHARE OAK `�Z r�i J 1 II - 3 10 9 4 3 3 2 229722 1 2 3 £ { 3 q . to 4 i 31RD40D � 13 12 11 3 22 3 J 2 1 10 II 2 a 3 t L°vON NEW°I130N 2 I I-'7 : 9 9 a 11 ��//��)) j1 jj"'�' LSV+ f ! o � t I ` 1� i 3 7 103 2 64 8 4 3 B I J -CJ O J 3 a 2 04 9S NII)� J '0 E 3 7 POINTE 3 A 3 3 4 7 /� 2530 4 9 6 J N S RE 6 2 4 2 N o s IT 13 3 CUTLOT 0 4 10 3 f-- a 12 6. I6 l4 It 2 FRANK iNOERSON 12 i 3 S 7 II 129836 3 2 348449 ' 2392'A270 II 10 a 13 (0 � . 8 H 4 I . . Qy 9 I4 16 10 ! 3 i 7 I 9 i— 1 14 9 13 22 IT 1 z IS2I - W 3 3- 4 3 6 20 1 10 2 2 J ° IB 19 r 19 ; 1 Q+ 4 17 9 t . 6 7 8 II 2 14 13 19 9 Qt PARK Z 1 3 7 4 I 0 i 2 3 4 3 13 9 1 I a 5 5 1O - s ENCS L� t B '5TH ADD, C 6 W Z 41 CC 4 IS 14 13 1 I2 I I 10 9, 9 4 12 to 10 9 ISTz ADo 10 nT = Q 3 4 - QQ 3 Q (n32 t6 B 9 12 IF 9TN t C 3 f low z Jm I 2 3 4 3 a 13 OUTLOT E 2 3 4 PRIOR LAKE. { NI < zl I6 3 4 II ` 1 1 2 2 4 I 1 3 ° , $ SA t t OUTCOT N�, SANO POINTE 9. IS � - RT R a 10 cy ' OUTLOT r... ? 23 0 2 3 i5 In W ; N . . a2 2 H A Dt , ND I 4 0 TH SHO I N ES 2 2 3 U� 9 ' S 2 3 4 223878 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE I dAfA C, - 15,394 4 !!1111 2Y pf 1 2 t4 1 ,ft T UXEi f_ tz l't 3RE 9 ( . X 7 ♦ 12 10 11 T ° s , - '—' eUl oto MEA W LAWN \ r PRIOR LAKE uPT t99T Sma 4 I wNovM t2;' i , t289 • . . - . . - - _ SCHMOKEL w- . nea _ WI LI TY SU N ' -- � ' U RVEYOR• Cctv acr Icer . .. 3C-0TT COU7tTY�. -NUIry ESOTA 1991 /i79 1995. - Y• a i N I/2. .SEC. 26 T. // 5 R. 22 MIS tS A ITIO: OF RECORDS AS ti~R AFP£LU.H Ill Tffi SCOTT CCOdTT OFFIC3 AFF£_?(W THE AM SS07L I t THLS G?�;;;:4 ; P 8; ICED O.LT FC2 1 i ItEFG^. E P867v: ASO r.: Coag. I Ty La AOT Rz37:y;I%LE F:8 AHY lt. ACCQEACIES m£LR COYtAl1:cA. LE COUNTY 140ROAD 960.00 42 j 394972 i Lp E AP • � .. Vt Z ~ `�;y OUTLOT ORE . !f'ti 0 3f3T66 IH . 383 vl R { u n l t� tur:� r� t^ rtv.� V[ f3 EAGLE RIDGE 8 . 2 3 , 6 o IIH3.T M 6 9}S � " I T 6C` 3 r e 9 a i 6 _ OVILOT Two 2 I 3 10 2 �4Q 3 2 n - I NE IH n 1 ACRES i M E C\R 4 17 2 12 A `N 2 _ _ 5 p �. � 19 �,•`tl f 7 � v 1 W 5 16 13 OUTLOT 0 rr 5 i 14 IS e 37 YT Q V HILL 14 13 1 .T.� (✓' i i./ 9 9 b 2 3 46 1 3 4 W < 13 6 7 Y� 3 T S HUMMINGBIRD TRq - 1 T KNOB ! 2 HILL 4 ! 8 a 2 4 ftft II W 6 3 2 i Z CUTIOT C — a 1 4J� V' I I — 1i 5 I Y i l '• T 8 19DO 102ND ' N _ T W { 312804 I 263877 �J a , ✓ 3 ¢ 2 w 4 3 KNOB 3 OUTLOT 3 OUTLOT C / 2 OUTLOT A 6 HILL { s i RC6Z T o Io b i4 j Lu 3 AOARXWAY (.7 24 w S ' OUTLOT E 22 O 25 OUTLOT O m W CARRIAGE 3 j 3 S. I .- . _ .. _. _ _� _����•—._.-__. a T ~ e WILLIAM J. SCRMOKEL NOV SC0T6V COUKTT .JUKE ,CNTY SURVEYOR m1m ESM . ' 11Im AUG 1997 N . 2 .6 A15 - 22 Original surveys and drawings o � O :a £ c c O � L N da cE •�> Cc Z cg m P 1 -M = i _ vJ (� z Q Q a� CJ t5 > N L -8` - 66 zp O O O �CCn �pC •� fQ m J = U� `/� U 2 a�ffi (n0 N � ii E 7C) E � � � :? 3 � a ' � :6 � » � � L Q It --- �'4\tivv 'iv 244• Lativ vk kv v 0 cuW i 0 . � 0 y ..:.. .. r. . tiJ >. .. yi v- C . U .� y.:i : . me k: q r: :4 \ y i:: : Location Map iL TM � ._. Location of Property IIA � 4 ! C2 H / IL Cil Ir \ F 'eWulf 0 IF t` N 1000 0 1000 Feet A CD3 � . CD O0i ; � z C� O to to to � ❑ O (D DO ® a 11 ❑s I Epps - d ® ❑4444 . . . . . : : : . . . :. . ::. :. . . .. . . :. . . . . ::. . . . . . . . . :. . . . . . .;.. . . . . . .: 4444 . . :. . . .: .:: 4: 444 . . . . . . .. ® , ( o s BEA 1 � s: e111►�� s� _ ► � �� 111111111■ - CC 1D � !111/111111111 " � \ll ' �� X11■■■� i ��i � �� ■r�j� X711 �� ■ �� �LL � � �11��11IP�� iii ►I ����i � t ■111i •� �; �� �� � Illllllli� ^� X1111 Pot - JRL r— tiumILUN L)R �� �� �� W �E � ! J JACKSON TR , SHA KOPEE Z Z 1413 C C ` } 2• 23 24 ST . T115N R22W 117 1 w l o C 8 TlllT' R , , • 115 ■ i i f f . 1 . ■ . f . . ■ i . 1 i i ski i f /� l i . � i i i� i . i i � � � � �. \� M 77ps logo f ii . f iif . if . si . i : if * f 11.1 /17 ■ I ! � ■ CC ■ w /IO T115N T115N R22W R22W R21W ' 24I 19 or � } 22 23 � ■ z � } 2726 4 (0 25 30 18 240th ST . 42 w w uj CEDARWOOD ST a �, ' • HILLS > HAMPTON ST . >� C > G ©� I �1� eC �f < �� w J 4 . 6 . o� ID �r1 � . vi ■ j FO Q �. �8 P R BIRD q�, a a o 7 , Q 59 co ir Q Q BIRO Q �~� o Lij tr q �- �� 7'R. ��' Q uj " 2 PEA 57 . i 4. LLS 0 I `� CT . CL SFq � GE KILL PK WY . WOOD G P PKWY . , CA AGE p ��� AVE• cI,Q < < Q # i . M , sf . i . . f . fi . fff . f TR * l4 106 Q ILL = , /06 SHORE �� > CARRIAGE LO • 4 OX HUNT c� c a HEMLOCK tp yp . CT . cr �- • w 'NAM 8L , • cn m _ ,c • r . ,. �z- cr en ./ `;`, RI ITTFRFIELD . . I�CIR . . . C . S .A . N . 42 UTILITY CROSSINGS ( EERNDALE AVE . AND CREST AVE . ) S 1 /4 COP. SEC 24 •� TI15N - R22W INP CIM CO r 24 = ■■{! Porte 1 Leo & Mdea V:ering (A 17 00 U I 7 ' I r I 4 SAN - MH- 2 PROPOSED STORM SEWER 50 Ob, Do- (SEE S.A.P. 70-642- 07) I j TOP 965.00 PROPOSED BITUMINOUS BIKEWAY INV- 955.80 ° - 12' PLUG aP I cB - - e. J _ 142 L. F. 8" PVC ® 0. 40% - - PROPOSED CONC. CURB & GUTTER - - C . S. A. H . 4Z FF - T-- - - - - 16 -- – D7 2 – �— – Y - - � � �56166 1. F. 12" CLASS 51 D- LP. B . ° � I I c6 7 HYDRANT, 6- VALVE, 2 LF, 6" CLASS 52 D.LP_ & 12'76" TEE /33 ' WATERMAIN WITH 8. O' MIN - COVER 5 • -- -- CB- 1 • � B 1111 = 31111 = 3 illl ; ! : 11 E - - - --- HYDRANT, 6" VALVE, 2 LF. 6 �_ _ T - BUR - [' CLASS 5 DJ.P. & 12"X6" TEE + - R 0 IEE- 2 INL-Ei_ iL --- 7 ' • ✓ TEE--NG d- G 4" 33-00' CB 23 I B 04 Y - -- 70.00' �� I ) I _ I g <. [ 75-oo�' , 2 —� OUTLET- 2 ; / . g --- r1 3 --- ` Fera N _ --- 12"X.1Y CROSS WITH - - - �' 12" D y ,)-( - 1 r �12" V/�LVE ,z"xs' REDucER To -- j -- L. , n 296 ; SOUTH AND 12' PLUG I 12 5' BEND ) �r REMOVE EX 12" PLUG, NECT I OI- 3A AN . MH -1 1 / i $ Y _ Fence $3 12" VALVE & EXTEND SHOWN Lj TO NORTH & WEST 965.75 II ( Ih r � J ) Coiner - Q I INPL� CE STORK 41 23 I v! � ' I I e+J't�6d ^ ! /� SELR INLET 140 S.Y. STREET Tk ePAaae ,f� / ' In I I RESTORATION REOb, I > JI LijLJ Par 11 ! rrkFy1� 7 City ee P a Ln e STRAIGHT LINE CUT $form t -- -L—J 1 scoff o. & w I ` I TACK & MATCH IX > ' ) Tory & .teao xorea xa:td.. .a,a..:10 .to..e-+ Fie9Rry & cyllh:o r4o..aaa & Liao st tare ' N Stott & ea„aoce A,.,.N: M - < ' Gods I _ z Bald.c U r_ BITUMINOUS Ylr ' Foshett o k RagN2 1Ed od R- & Reaee 5 Dow" Gude Pncd 7 Puce' is KodwN i Porcei 10 I Parcel 12 [ Parcel 13 Pacei Ia Po ed 9 I Q 1 I .i 6R5 Porcd . 4 I Ahrat.00s (ED) _ Porcd 3 i & 1K1e uj Porcd 5 Parcel 6 I 1 15.00• I FUTURE 8 SAN[ ARY SEWER 0 0- 4071 I 1014 LF. 12 - LASS 51 D.LP. .� y ; Q WATERMAIN WI 8.0' MIN. COVE o i i Z - 182 LF. 8 LASS 52 D_LP. HYDRANT, 6" VALVE, 15 LF. I6" CLASS 52 D.1_P. c 12"X6" TEE w WATERMAIN TH 8. 0' MIN_ C04R I I I i z w I / 10.00 I Ex 9 VALVE I I EX . INV. 954- 34 ( VERIFY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF SAN. MH - 1 k MH- 2 ) 1 I � EX. 8 WATERMAIN v I q REMOVE IX 8" LUG, CONNECT 8- D.I.P.. I AND EXTEND A� SHOWN ! EX. 8� SANITARY - \ I .. -- — ' ra SEWER O 0407. I s1m I 7 EX. SA' - ' iDP 974. 72 ! / INV- 553.50 I NOTES: I ENGINEER SHALL VE10FY INVERT �V- �• ' ! / PR1oR To coNsTRudnoN VERIFY MANHOLE TOPS, INVERTS, do FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS_ PRIOR TO UTILITY CONSTRUCTION . I HAMPTON , ST. STORM SEWER LOCATIONS MAY BE INCORRECT_ b =--v — (SEE S. A.P. 70- 642- 07 STORM SEWER PLANS) GRAPHIC SCALE ` 1 MAINTAIN 18" MIN , VERTICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN STORM SEWER & WATERMAIN. - - - -- - _ ( h 7T50 It ) i RECORD PL N SEPTEMBER 1995 DATE OESCRIPTfON DESICNEe _ CITY OF PRIOR LAKE NEiREr aR,IEr THAT `MIs PUN- S=EfX1� a'>0'� N I DRAWN GGTim CITY PROJECT NO. 93- 07 aF P.", ..S PREPARED B. NE a UNDER N- DiREC / / •ICONSUL TING ENGINEERS � �— DRAYRR GG S,wERVIvoN .ND TNni 1 .N . wL1 �edsiEREc S.A. H_ - 42 SANITARY SEWER & WATERMAIN CROSSINGS SUPCR SMAC ND) PIA P Am A >M L EQ Or THE u` GR APNiC SCALE ,ia < a � I MaleT Sfe'1" BCf & aSs( CiateS inc .nC . sI— -. __ D HORIz- s EERNDALE AVE. & CREST AVE. 1959 SLOAN PLACE (612) 774- 602' ST PAUL MwNESDTa 55: 17 0 J 5 OA TL MAY 1093 SHEET .J- OF SHEETS PRG'JAC ? NO 102 - 007 D�,F t/9/ .'3 reE� No. —. 1380C SRELAKD PARKWAY 612 546- 0432 MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55647 1 PL007 — t . � I � ; L . *I I > IIIK i I 7�7 i 141 IT 1i CS� H 42 —r-I— ... ----- s It ` YD N ALVE A. I ` Y 13'X6' LEAD F, 12'X6" TEE r ,` 1`4 `� . . ? 12' PLUG Nff _ a . y y ',�. i I . ✓' `: ' u. : �rT , i % 1 &I-LT2 ml,aLIF >;90 - - - - - - - - - - -- --- - -- -- - - - - L III , i _-- _- - --- -s— �-r Y - _ _ - - _ _ -_ _ N.Pr t ,LLL - -- - �r - - - -- — - ' I �_ J1 Sh_4 L —_ - - y LL, , —i f � LLLLrLLrLLLLALLLLLLLLpLLLLLLL�,,L_ LL -�LY -~LLLLLL-LLLLLLLL,L,LL� . . _ _— — _ /� — _ _ __.- -_ ._. _ — ya 185+ r ,i : : - ..._ _ t 04 �_. �• -- --- — — _— _ _ _ _ _— — — — — _-__ —_ — 1 824 5: .- L. - LLL'L16"X12"RFDUCf3i r r}3 Ja of ,. Y _.. ^ MH3 _ - MH4 } '� Y * — _ MH�s- 16" PLUG 1 --;.-- I 1 1 I .,_ r 12' BF VAL �- 0' -� LIL;LZy - - - is - - — ;� %'LL,. LN L, x t 16"X16'CROSS 2 ; i j 16' PLUG 1 \ ^=-r*� , 1 h ` �' 4 t T LL' / ^}> i I �.., Z t Z .y XI ,r-•-. ,-, - LLL . ,-, t % , 1, i ;/ t"L ru_uw 2 ; r ,' tom` -- HYD w/VALVE c i 0'-8' PVC SDR35 ® 0.402 18 -8" LEAD 40'-8" PVC �R35 0 0. 4 i �, ': `: Y V40'-8' PVC SDR35 ® 0- 407 r ' jp ` J i [ 7880.26 INV WITH PLUG � q d / 4II �1 .i L r 4 \ 1189+90 90 RT n 16`X8" TEE 859.80 INV WITH PLUG `; -w` � • 867.14 INV WITH PLUG ± { ': ? A 4 i is B M . ELEV. = 852 47 I / :w r w�Iiw =LtLit i s' or DATUM = N.G.V.D. (1929 ADJ.) z i . ? ,, ,. " ' - �^ , ` r !: , :,, lt`zt SPIKE IN PPO i € e ` J � ti ' ILL +j J I'' STA 183+79 63' LT } i 4 -- -. ,', 1 ' II j ' ` , Y Li. I I IL LLLL, K I `�. _ . . ....._. __.. . --. ... . _.. - ..... _ . _ _ . . . -t. ... _. . — _. — - -- - __ -- �— _ r. -- - -- -. . _ ..... - _ -- . - _ _ _ i _.. ...... _. _._ . . _._ __ .. L' LL _ _.. _ . . . . :: : � _ - .. ..... I _. _. - - h _.. .. ._. . . . .. ........ ..._. .... ... _......: ...__.. .... . .. _.. 910 __.. - . _ . . - - 910 _ ._ _. _. . _ _. LLLLLLLLLLL� . . .... _ .. . 1. _ . . LLLLLLLLL I I I _ -1 . _ .- . . - -- - _........ . ...... - — ... - - -- L . ... .. .... - rLrrLrLLrLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL . _. - .. ... .... _ _ . . ._..... . . __ . _ _. ... ._. ._. _ _ . --_ _ .... . .. _ _ . . _ . _ . . . . .1 . _ _ _ _ _ ... ._.._ . . .... . ...._ _ __ . ..... .... ... . _ _ . . . _ . _ . . . ,_ . . 900 _ .__.. _ 900 . ._..... .. .._ ._ .._. .. __. ___ ...... ---.. . .. . ..... . . _ ... _ _- . ..-. . ..... . . ... -- _ __ .. _ ... - .. .._ . .... .... . . _. — TOR 8954 �...._. - -- - -- - _ - -- --- - _... _. 5 LLLLLLLLLLL� _ . . ........ .... -- _._.... _a.... _...-.-..... . . .I......_._.. ......._. .. _...... .... . _... - .. _ - .. ._ . .....F - ..... . . :� . .::: ... - _ . .... ......... -.._ _.. ..... _.. . ._ ___ .. ... . . . .. . .. _.. .. ... _ .... _ _.._. __. ...__. _... . ._. _._ _.. _.__ ..........__ ....._. __.... .. 89Q _ -:� oPosEo _ � __ _ _.._ _ _-- MILE890 -- __..._._.. MA1NiAM j..A&L .... ..._ _ . . _ _.. ._. . _ �. _...... __-7 _... . _ ....... .. . . --.- -.. ....... _ ..... _ - — ... -_. Z __ _.. ._- ._ .._. _ ......... .:_ _.. __ . .... .. _. . ._ .r ._ - -. . .... .__ l - LLLL 880 _ .. - ._ . .. .. '-... _.... -SANtTAR.Y. ... ..._. _.. . . . _ _. — _.. .... _..... _._.... +- - . .. . ffL 880 LLLLrLLLLL . . .. __... _......... .. , - - T3 . GRAr) .&,..LLL..LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL- -- CANt Et�l . .. J,Id . ... - - T _. _ ._.. . 77- _..... _ .. _ F COVER .. .... . __... _ E. _ _ _ . _ _ . 1. _ . _ __ . ..__. _ - _. _. __ _ . __ .. .. . _ 870 _ .-. ........ L. +. . . __ +_.._. .... _ - -- —_ - --- r---- k 870 _ � - — - - LL _-L- __ . -- .. ... . .. .. --- - -- 'FLL-L1. - _ - L LLL z— - i _ } L. _ _. .. _ _ ..... ... .. _........_ ... t I ... . ... F.._ r .... 27 - R6P _ I _._ -r. ......... .... . _... _.`- -- _ sD 26 @ s6s_s2:. w _.. _ 860 ..._.._ T7tr _ --- — _ n E_ _ - - -- _ - 860 _._— LLL I ......._ i - ..__.. - -1 _. _ _ _ .. . ...... _. _ LLLLLLLLrLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL� -- -- - � �Fi:S� - ._ ._....... ..__._ . _ _ _. _ . .. . . .. . . . . . 1 .._. ..._._.. .. 1. _._ . . . . .. __. .. _ . .. . ._ _ . . ... ... ..... _._... ...........-_...._ ._._.__. . _ . I 858-92 ._E;... _.. .._.._. ... -_ _ _ .. t _ : . -- - -- -- --- __ - - L. _t_ _ ___ - . ��— - . . _. _ _ _ . _ _ _ 1 f ..asLss _.. 24. .....Rc __ .. 3s L _. . . ... ...- —i — 850 __ IIII� 850 _.. _ . 1. . . .. .... -._ ..._.-L' _.. .. ._ ..... -- LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL -- _. 37 -- _ _.. _. ._ — — — — ----- - LLLL . . ._..._._- .... ..__._. LL. _...._ _ _—F..... . ..._t 8'X8'7( — __.. _._ — .. .... .. ._. . ._ . .... _.WATER .... CHT. BOO.. _. __. __ — — — _ --- �— Ai IN�B=_ - —1- -- 4 33. . — _.._LLLLLLL ......7 __ . . ._.. -- —a _ __� ..- _. 84Q 84Q _.... _ . 7 - _._ _ _._ . . _ _... .. ._ ... _ _. _ _ _. _... .... x _ LLLL __ 841 -_ ! :'_... 1.... _ s . ..... g r - ----- ---- _ I .. _.. ._ . ... ... .. ... ... _____ F. ............ . LM-___._.... . .._ __._.. _ _.. . .... __ __.-_.... ... __... .-__ d . _. ._ ._. . . ... __ _ . _..... ._...._... .__..-_. ....... .. .... __.. .. _ 1...... _ ........ _. . 1f7 .._. _._ -.. _. p111I 84.1..26_-E _. .__:. �, _ . _..._ ! 830 _ * i ��9 --t 8 _ t — 7 ....... _ t +' +' _.... I :_ 1 4 _.. . ,. _ LATE OESCRIp i :ON DES GINED EE9_ LLLLLLLLLLLLLL 1 _ F _ . . _ H�� LER THAT �s PA .: saEa cAnoN. 1326 ENERGY PARK DRIVE CHECKED CIN OF PRIOR LAKE ... . ii ae T wns PRwAa o ar ME R UY R ur F.um ST. PAUL. MINNE}OTA 55108 CITY PROJECT N0. 95-09 .- .. _- .... t .. i UPERt 9IX: ANU TrIAT 1 Ak A DULY RE TEPID 612 644-4.389 p ( L 1 �RA'�7P1 JA11 - s w SANITARY SEWER A TERM - -- T- -—_ t -� - ?R 7Y.tt �1"'4�` Uti��`ER �A OF � • C S IN '- I ;._. sT o LoN s ; A� SCALE CSAH 42 W A A A ___. ---,----T-- — -�— I � - Is s ®0 S. A. P. 70-642- 10 185+00 TO 197+ 00 4201 -3 - - DAW REcxG. JVYM � �. I IiI 5 OAS JAN. 1997 yy,:E;UTL 3c` 6 SHEETS PROJECT N0, 102-059-20 -_ _ _ ' ' -' i .__ - E. _ Yi 4D I V���RL NG 9 : 'r. : iY ar �, 'N v. - _ ` - - • � 'V _ WAaE Y:£9c ( NS B lt_ ; a. �-alG - ' - •• '� i _ � � �c i . If fifOl .. - - - ~ = _ - _ - i . - / - '] � . ► .. - ( .y\ SOUTH 1: • :-v Y; _ e mom man �/ .i In la mmm _ - - - _ T � f - r loge - '� SEC . : . . a22 52 =mm .mm 44 mIr 97 mmmpm i _ - Q -CHECK DAM 1� ` _ .'� ` c . r - i / - I - D , 1�" S( i•^ ��v( Am mom - -! - • I mm _ ice ' ) 6D - T - � '^ a I L ~� 71 �� , •' \ ! ommm OP Off - ev \ � Q � � - _ ` , . t .._?� Jf � - i - " w2ER _ VA. ' ' ' f HANE (;ABLE �� ` Am ` ]0a ire t - � - , . . •> zC ) ,y PORTER - ' - �• • 1ED 1ElEPI �' > • • - - � ' - 1 \ +' \ T - UR / ! ' icN T . � ;� ( _ 7 - wr . � B -�ST- - \m`- ` 50 TEMP. EASEMENT r "f 1 ;t Y UBT - .w 'Or ' / � �a r mo 0f . 's / IFLEEe Z Z '?o UG 44 VIP "Ims, IV 10 DILI O STUB ' , CUP _ _ OmmIm �- y _ 7 - L'J i / md"OVIVO. 28 WfPL 6 p p, CHI Ir =AA1 OR VIVO Or mml s, mam sm p OF Jam mom Om m ON mm - _ 0mom T - _ _ - O, ` � i ' !vim _ - ` 7 T3 ` _ m' 4 � 1 s 7 PIKE LAKEmum . + � I � �mm 170 T - v 1. - r - � m m", mom �ST-2T �. Im CS(ECK DAY Or VIP 10 - � ]+ITER SURFACE • , �< �� ` 1 ' • -' 1 i ' 7 _ - - ' _ /w . 3 pow 33 _ - Z19. 00 FZ9 1973 - M4T - I _1 _ 1 - _ N tl 24VVw - J' - 7 RCPT 4 LINE _ .. - _-.._ .. . . .:: .,. ,-. . , _ . . . . - - f 7175 N,1R 22W OF SEC � ! �O 1 -;\ 1 C IF ._ _ - . 2� EMP- ` - - O 8-0430 _ m, z! _ ,l mm mar me ? I. 20 +94 . ZS !SURVEY ) _ - A = 19•rPI . Ia + B6- 3 ! SURvEYI RAG GR SHALL CONTACT PUBLIC UTILITIES Y7 \ =.R _C�T7CN CF ALL U'lOERGROUNO WIRES , t`'•� -0� - _Tem + a : 23• SB' S0' __-LES, C_^•:OUITS. P.PESOVAVHOLES, VALVES OR EJJ` Pr. 2. + 12 2e5uHv TI mmj�. ^� ='I 3JR!ED STRUCTURES BEFORE GIGGING. E / E SHALL REPAIR ANY OF THE AaOVE WHICH ARE A : la• I4' 10 ' ��� =E.Y.OVED OR CZMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION ' ` SOUTH Iia CC-K� . w L PAS .T NO �5T TO THE OWNER_ 'o J'.; / r a •4 . 3A a3lcOwsTa1 — �� _ = o 1� ' wits oz 0: n • ]O. 3 f , T • a O2 (•I0.T. Tom] 3,541"fT3T1 , A : • f. 00' �. ifa . S.SL (SOwsiwl • 2- ST O 3 BENOS A . • :3 ' aa- .j 172 . • • S31Ca•f TR) :41423 TO bI +37 � B • 30-3" STA 0 +00 ' : � _ EY 1 1•• • ta3p M (CO6TR1 ZOENO5 + 00 • 30 3 11I (Ba . 33 aJ PCRw3iN1 • ( - - ] T . • AS A• •a • •f > . Pa a91GOff TAI _ = Y. AI w OO • ].] ]Z - rf0 O 6 SEMS � • . w a • •3 . 02 ' 04 —• - L • fO_ / 7 + >aam s • . ]0- 3 . 30.3' Fi4 !N+ w TO 196•20 € SURVEY a ( PIPE \ wE nC• TO Z. 90 • . aY 110 T2a3T 'T2+a3 c . T. SA' L ' 3. b' l ` A.aa� �N\ 70 . \\'a. 2 SENDS 2 SENOS mor iBa+N TO :N+57 : B-/.nro (e7a B3 - / =7 SOUTH �•!E SEC- 21 m,mE SUPVEY \ \ �115N • R \.TO •1�r /•' • T a • TJ : suwvE>P -- ^ aP Z922m 65 ( SVRVEI7 \ (33 P ! I +OOf SUNvEYI- • � 20o . » S.+cows 1 6 + zD • z2 ' le' - S�c _ 3 . 30. w Si OR M_ it .I 3P {I"' • 1 34 70 //jI / P 1. 7+603 ( SURVEY) . _JRVEV/ ` . _ - _ ,{/ 4 .IB •OB' 13' - tt cJRVEY -7 / `N _. S va LINE OF SEC_ 23, TII5% R22w Y I mm3I m% mm -14 smm C: _ — — a _ _ - - t3 - ---_ _ = ME mr 3 - _ _ - ----r— t--- _ — 1 _ _ _ J —._mmmm.I______r ---_ — — mmmm . _ —� _ J ' / 112 SEC •• �� // � J"') /'� /1 _ THIS I APPEAR (N THE SCOTT RECORDS AS ' V J Jv- /�'•y!/ G/L/_/ T}tEY APPEAR W THESCOTT COUNTY 3 OFFICES AFFECTING THE AREA SHOWN THIS DRAWING IS TO BE USED ONLY FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES AND THE 000N- 7Y IS N07 RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY IN - f ACCURACIES HEREIN CONTAINED. if 1i 66 I It O5 4 t NATURAIL oorH4 AIL 3 I t V ER UNG SETAL 4 3 20 6394 5 � 6 7 10 9 14 13 rrrr r t2 11 ` 17 ',.. i oil 12 y B i I OUt I 1 �'- .A.. 2 4 B13 C SD / PAUL GRAFFUNOER L O 197162 '�_-- - 19T369 t a r 197390 14 15 1 �1 u Y 5 V 9 10 1 r \ I / 32 f . GrT /} gr. Lo x 6 _ „- _ - OUTLOT 6 _ ? , . _ _ - DRIVE 3 c roy BLOCK 2 P B 3 4 5 6 7 8 q F 7 0,9 . MAR."DALE a �' y 2 OUTLOT Com` - 3 j r � � 9 � J ` 4 NBLO K 3 � YOUNG MES CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION I \\ I n 1 2 3F OF METROPOLITAN MINNEAPOLIS /[\\ \ 4 m i POND 10 i [ � . er ,J J J0144 R 51WER O! • � � .._— . . 140766 /j/ �� `7 � � /, � `,�9o.J�+��aelr•-w�ccjwc+�._ !� r n � � i % � 543. 40 309. 60 - iti'• - ' J L� CHARLES 7 CRAMER •' - / �' wwN � i 164373 1(fI 65 WILLIAM J. SCHMOKEL COUNTY SURVEYOR. FE 9 . 1989 _ SCOTT COUNTYMINNESOTA NOV. 1982 MAY 1976 / 20 / 72 N 23 - 115 - 22 112 SESs25 T. H5Re22 j i T.'.:3 IS A C `:::1L4TICh DF ACCCB: ' AS 1 .._ r 4r.- _ ll li T:_ SaTT t� L1Y CFF I :. Ai:E :TIf, ; ll:= t'.:A is 13 G _ L:_7 Tf 1: G . T 8Lt]I:A. i _ .1 L.. 1 465. 00 - 600.00 S 33 07 � '"—'r=-� 541•" 9 1 465 .2 160038 r A I if if 240560 - - �a ---- IN JI) 1 V N K � � \ ^ \ ))) t 4 :a" Si6✓iiN1E--lGTfR[R� \ , STEPHEN E5 FRANK KESy�.0-` +--nom'-//�. , ' - - 149845 199642 / '� ( � �4' / �� CHARLES FAV USN \ 1 T ^ 4�yk 214905 I' - - It ' 226084 740. 79 - 199846 IA1 �P '� 9. 98 586 .01 1 1 - _. 400 I , Je3.-� \\ f jBERNARD VIERLING � 160038 1 r ; Let O O STEPHEN KES 214728 � 160038 ST EPNEN KES / 21•T28 ' n „� DAVID BADEN 131709 Q tJ -f (V s92 409.97 FRANK KES V 9J DANIEL SCNERER 122846 199846 .. i o N 252059 -� g •' Y - 432665 LOREN SQUIRES - - Ct� 243824 ✓ �� gy' __ 1 - s+ 31 GORDON 6ENEKE t E1 DANIEL KLAUM 1z5D9a � o JL s . � A --; A 678 .8 251 . 18 274. 41 COUNTY ROAD 42 744.80 400 f 't ' i WILLIAM J. SCNMOKEL COUNTY SURVEYOR FEB 1989 SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA NOV. 1982 - ' - . - - S 23 - 115 - 22 COMPI .. N .f/2 SEC 2 4 T. / / 5 R. 22 THIS I AP EAR IN THE SCOTT CO LINTY i3 THEY APPEAR W TYE SC07T COUNTY OFFICES AFFECTING THE AREA SHOWN THIS DRAWING 13 TO BEUSED ONLY FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES AND THE COUN- 1Y IS NOT RESPONSISLE FOR ANY IN - ACCURACIES HEREIN CONTAINED. HORIZON DRIVE OUTLOT ORfZOq A COUNTY ROAD 16 ►AR2 I HORIZ NH IGHT ' RD 1 2 , , a ° 13 I 'J { 2 11 If - 2 3 p _ Q 249923 ✓ 198768 % ' 12 iJ '{. 163136 1 - — 350. 17 . - • - 110. 17 2 ° ° 7 ° 6 It � If W ~ = 6 C Z Z D HO HEIG S 4TH ADDN z bR/SON _ o � 7 o 10 7 > n 'MALLAGE LINDEMANN - u 177117 y 1 DRIVE �,�• ° AID 7 10 If 12 IS `0 Oq H. +TICKING 194743 n p JAMES FkP;AL1E 1 0 2 193481 1 OUTLOT A X RUN IST AMIN d I GOJ RALPH GOODE ' 198697 . ;>7 n /r 206 .71 � � � , li /t� • 71 0 1`ia''L QE 59 Y 185468 0 1476'15 0 ff 205 .71 -' • SS6 f • . L JAN 1390 PEA i56t WILLIAM d SCHMOKEL ��. 1682 COLNTY S1:RVEYGRr DEC. "17` 5[071 "'OWTT, MINNESOTA JUN[ I: 17 `-4 RAJ` HT7 NIS - 24 1 - 22 -- � // / C�. ' / // T 115 / C '/J� -^J THIS ISA SARIN THE CO TCOUNTY L L G iTf• / . v) / L THEY APPEAR IN THE THE COUNTY L•� (� OFFICES AFFECTING 7HE AREA SHOWN THIS DRAWING IS TO BE USED ONLY FOH REFERENCE PURPOSES AND THE COON - . TY IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY 1N - ACCURACIES HEREIN CONTAINED. • i ' a w N S P CO. EAS ENT o N 1 GOODWIN MA R SHtA LL */a W . W. MARSHALL f WM . MARSHALL 0/0 m COMERON MARSHALL ROY ERICKSON ` 235118 vY 47 1 1 L i RSHALL -_ BERNARD VIERLING - - 160038 .i / 1 2L I on - � a a d U � C52d� JOHN NUGENT 249257 111 T. STENSON E . GREGORY 0. VOSS 203966 205096 233599 ; � . T �.....%' —LE HNERT --� 0340 \O1 ! STEVEN JENKINS 210454 � ' h4 VVV\\\�••/// z rl ' z k j •`L r 3 WILLIAM J. SCHMOKEL _ COUNTY SURVEYOR. SCOTT COUNTY, UMNESOTA FEB 1989 • Nov 1982 , S 24 - 115 - 22 • i 25 T //5 R 22 YLS :S 1V :TJ !3 1C3 g 1+U5,•'E TI. l3 R9i C�T.�sS-T r•.i �iY tJr I - -COUNTY ROAD 42 FI ST AJDIN T 8 1 2 3 4 3 NO TH 1 SH RE dA $ 5 CREST WATER zo 19 18 IT 8 11 14 IS 12 II IO 9 9 T a S 2 D � V a D 4 3 dl TE 3 4 s 1 a 7' 9 C. RAINS 133342 1 " ElNiD AO D ' NTOWER ADVN 2 5 1' q 3 2 f 4 IJ u 4 3 IV 2 ; 33 G u 2 ouzo J it 0. NANSON /'1 ! 12 it 10 A 9 ° 7 2 � I- 9 e 7 6 g 10 I 2 3 1 4 32 ° 1 4 160-123 `f 701 NCRTHI SHARE OAK `�Z r�i J 1 II - 3 10 9 4 3 3 2 229722 1 2 3 £ { 3 q . to 4 i 31RD40D � 13 12 11 3 22 3 J 2 1 10 II 2 a 3 t L°vON NEW°I130N 2 I I-'7 : 9 9 a 11 ��//��)) j1 jj"'�' LSV+ f ! o � t I ` 1� i 3 7 103 2 64 8 4 3 B I J -CJ O J 3 a 2 04 9S NII)� J '0 E 3 7 POINTE 3 A 3 3 4 7 /� 2530 4 9 6 J N S RE 6 2 4 2 N o s IT 13 3 CUTLOT 0 4 10 3 f-- a 12 6. I6 l4 It 2 FRANK iNOERSON 12 i 3 S 7 II 129836 3 2 348449 ' 2392'A270 II 10 a 13 (0 � . 8 H 4 I . . Qy 9 I4 16 10 ! 3 i 7 I 9 i— 1 14 9 13 22 IT 1 z IS2I - W 3 3- 4 3 6 20 1 10 2 2 J ° IB 19 r 19 ; 1 Q+ 4 17 9 t . 6 7 8 II 2 14 13 19 9 Qt PARK Z 1 3 7 4 I 0 i 2 3 4 3 13 9 1 I a 5 5 1O - s ENCS L� t B '5TH ADD, C 6 W Z 41 CC 4 IS 14 13 1 I2 I I 10 9, 9 4 12 to 10 9 ISTz ADo 10 nT = Q 3 4 - QQ 3 Q (n32 t6 B 9 12 IF 9TN t C 3 f low z Jm I 2 3 4 3 a 13 OUTLOT E 2 3 4 PRIOR LAKE. { NI < zl I6 3 4 II ` 1 1 2 2 4 I 1 3 ° , $ SA t t OUTCOT N�, SANO POINTE 9. IS � - RT R a 10 cy ' OUTLOT r... ? 23 0 2 3 i5 In W ; N . . a2 2 H A Dt , ND I 4 0 TH SHO I N ES 2 2 3 U� 9 ' S 2 3 4 223878 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE I dAfA C, - 15,394 4 !!1111 2Y pf 1 2 t4 1 ,ft T UXEi f_ tz l't 3RE 9 ( . X 7 ♦ 12 10 11 T ° s , - '—' eUl oto MEA W LAWN \ r PRIOR LAKE uPT t99T Sma 4 I wNovM t2;' i , t289 • . . - . . - - _ SCHMOKEL w- . nea _ WI LI TY SU N ' -- � ' U RVEYOR• Cctv acr Icer . .. 3C-0TT COU7tTY�. -NUIry ESOTA 1991 /i79 1995. - Y• a i N I/2. .SEC. 26 T. // 5 R. 22 MIS tS A ITIO: OF RECORDS AS ti~R AFP£LU.H Ill Tffi SCOTT CCOdTT OFFIC3 AFF£_?(W THE AM SS07L I t THLS G?�;;;:4 ; P 8; ICED O.LT FC2 1 i ItEFG^. E P867v: ASO r.: Coag. I Ty La AOT Rz37:y;I%LE F:8 AHY lt. ACCQEACIES m£LR COYtAl1:cA. LE COUNTY 140ROAD 960.00 42 j 394972 i Lp E AP • � .. Vt Z ~ `�;y OUTLOT ORE . !f'ti 0 3f3T66 IH . 383 vl R { u n l t� tur:� r� t^ rtv.� V[ f3 EAGLE RIDGE 8 . 2 3 , 6 o IIH3.T M 6 9}S � " I T 6C` 3 r e 9 a i 6 _ OVILOT Two 2 I 3 10 2 �4Q 3 2 n - I NE IH n 1 ACRES i M E C\R 4 17 2 12 A `N 2 _ _ 5 p �. � 19 �,•`tl f 7 � v 1 W 5 16 13 OUTLOT 0 rr 5 i 14 IS e 37 YT Q V HILL 14 13 1 .T.� (✓' i i./ 9 9 b 2 3 46 1 3 4 W < 13 6 7 Y� 3 T S HUMMINGBIRD TRq - 1 T KNOB ! 2 HILL 4 ! 8 a 2 4 ftft II W 6 3 2 i Z CUTIOT C — a 1 4J� V' I I — 1i 5 I Y i l '• T 8 19DO 102ND ' N _ T W { 312804 I 263877 �J a , ✓ 3 ¢ 2 w 4 3 KNOB 3 OUTLOT 3 OUTLOT C / 2 OUTLOT A 6 HILL { s i RC6Z T o Io b i4 j Lu 3 AOARXWAY (.7 24 w S ' OUTLOT E 22 O 25 OUTLOT O m W CARRIAGE 3 j 3 S. I .- . _ .. _. _ _� _����•—._.-__. a T ~ e WILLIAM J. SCRMOKEL NOV SC0T6V COUKTT .JUKE ,CNTY SURVEYOR m1m ESM . ' 11Im AUG 1997 N . 2 .6 A15 - 22 Page I o Frank Boyles From : Mike Gundlach , Council Member [mgundlach@cityofpriorlake . com] - Sent : Tuesday , March 13 , 2001 9: 39 PM To : Frank Boyles Subject : Fw : Proposed Prior Lake zoning changes fyi . . . --- Original Message -- From : Greg & Tia Mack To : izieska cityofpriorlake . com ; mgundlach@cityofpriorlake . com ; jpeters_en cityofpriorlake . com ; % eri� icson & cityofpriorlake . com ; wmader(a. cityofpriorlake . com Sent : Tuesday, March 13 , 2001 8 : 29 PM Subject : Proposed Prior Lake zoning changes To : Wesley Mader Jim Ericson Jim Peterson Mike Gundlach Joseph Zieska From: Greg & Tia Mack 14472 Bluebird Trail NE Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE : City proposal for the Vierling Farm Property zoning change Dear City Council members , I am writing to inform you of my concerns with the City of Prior Lake' s proposal to change the zoning of the Vierling Farm property from an agricultural zone to a residential housing zone . I have two fundamental challenges with this proposal. 1 - The City's decision to eliminate the opportunity for the Vierling's to continue their family business of farming . The farming institution is what this country, state and city were built from. If there are individuals out there that are willing to continue in a business that founded this land in spite of the continued restrictions from government that make it increasingly challenging to make a profit and a comfortable living, I say let them. The City of Prior Lake wouldn't consider doing this to a small business owner, why should the Vierling' s business be any different? 2 - This would not be consistent with what I understood to be the City of Prior Lake's vision to keep Prior Lake " small town" The City has refused quite a few big retailers to establish businesses in the City if Prior Lake (and for this 1 applaud you) . The lower levels of traffic have been instrumental in keeping this City a safe and inviting place to live . We purchased our home in Prior Lake, a significantly higher property tax zone, for this specific reason. I am happy to pay the additional property tax dollars to make up for the lack of "big business tax" income for the city - simply for the level of safety it provides . I feel that the addition of the hundreds of houses (that would likely result from the rezoning of this land) would result in a major increase in traffic on both County Road 18 and County Road 42 (in an already high traffic area with Casino travelers) as people would need to travel to Shakopee, Savage or Burnsville to buy groceries , clothing and household items . The increase in traffic and the additional high priced homes , would certainly make this area an appealing target for crime . We live in between the big city and the casino and I would strongly encourage that the City of Prior Lake not put in the development in the high traffic area of 18 & 42 to advertise that there are prime opportunities to make crime pay. Sincerely, Greg Mack 3 / 14/01 L :\TEMPLATETILEINF O . D O C 0� PR 'to ti y v � P 41IN N E S O� CITY OF PRIOR LAKE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE YEAR 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24, TOWNSHIP 115, RANGE 22 You are hereby notified that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at Prior Lake Fire Station # 1 , located at 16776 Fish Point Road, SE, on Tuesday, January 1 , 2001 at 6 : 30 p .m . , or as soon thereafter as possible . The purpose of the public hearing is to consider a proposal to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map for 320 acres of property located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pile Lake Trail and CSAH 18 in the SE t/4 of Section 23 and the SW '/4 of Section 24, Township 115 , Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density . Legal Description : The Southwest 11/4 of Section 2, Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota ; And The Southeast 1/4 of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should attend this public hearing . The Planning Commission will accept oral and or written comments . If you have questions regarding this matter, contact the Prior Lake Planning Department at 447 - 9810 . Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator City of Prior Lake To be published in the Prior Lake American on Saturday, January 6, 2001 . 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00-084pn. 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 Mailing Information and Lists AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL COUNTY OF SCOTT ) ) ss STATE OF MINNESOTA) of the City of Prior Lake County of Scott, State of Minnesota, being dul sworn, says on the lj*' day of 1 . , 2004 , she served e attached list of pe sons to have an int rest in the U(m � j , by mailing to them a opy thereof, enclosed in an envelope, postage prepaid, and be depositing same in the post office at Prior Lake, Minnesota, the last known address of the parties . Subscribed and sworn to be this day of , 2000 . NOTARY PUBLIC L:\DEPTWORK\BLANKFRM\MAILAFFD.DOC O� P R '10 H � U � M1NN ES0 P CITY OF PRIOR LAKE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE YEAR 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24 , TOWNSHIP 115, RANGE 22 You are hereby notified that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at Prior Lake Fire Station # 1 , located at 16776 Fish Point Road, SE, on Tuesday, January 1 , 2001 at 6 : 30 p .m . , or as soon thereafter as possible . The purpose of the public hearing is to consider a proposal to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map for 320 acres of property located on the north side of CSAR 42 between Pile Lake Trail and CSAH 18 in the SE '/4 of Section 23 and the SW '/4 of Section 24, Township 115 , Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density . Legal Description : The Southwest 1/4 of Section 2 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota; And The Southeast 1/4 of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should attend this public hearing . The Planning Commission will accept oral and or written comments . If you have questions regarding this matter, contact the Prior Lake Planning Department at 447- 9810 . Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator City of Prior Lake Mailed on Friday, January 5 , 2001 . 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\00-084mn. 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 RAMONA WHIPPS 23605 DREXEL AV JORDAN MN 55352 US WEST INC CHARLES & JUDITH CRAMER 6300 S SYRACUSE WAY 13496 PIKE LAKE TRL UNIT 70 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 ENGLEWOOD CO 80111 TIMOTHY W & PATRICIA A BRIDE GMAC MORTGAGE 5260 CEDARWOOD ST NE 3451 HAMMOND AV PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 P . O . BOX 780 WATERLOO IA 50704 MICHAEL E & CYNTHIA L DODGE CHARLES G & CAROL L PAVLISH 5610 CEDARWOOD ST 4262 140 ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DOUGLAS W ROACH JOSEPH L KINNEY 5545 CEDARWOOD ST NE 4270 140 ST W PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSN LOT 1 PARTNERSHIP 30 9TH ST S SUE G DIRKES MPLS MN 55402 943 CEMETERY IN ASPEN CO 81611 - 1079 HAROLD D & JUDY K BOHLEN RALPH 0 & DELOYCE I GOODE 13380 HICKORY IN SE 9132 UPTON AVE S PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 BLOOMINGTON MN 55431 TERRY J & JEAN A FOSKETT ROBERT A HOBSON 5279 140 ST NE 5409 140 ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 KERRY ANN SMITH JOSEPH G & DIANE M ZIESKA 5299 140 ST NE 5316 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 MICHAEL C & LINDA L SMITH KEITH R & ANNETTE DICKIE 5313 140 ST NE 5336 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 STEVEN C THOM MARTIN N REITZ 5335 140 ST NE 5356 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 KAREN J KOSKELIN DANIEL J & LEONA J MEYER 5355 140 ST NE 5376 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JUANITA M JONES RODGER E & ELAINE D OLSON 5375 140 ST NE 5396 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 MICHAEL D LIEPOLD DAVID T & KATHLEEN M SANDVIK 5395 140 ST NE 5410 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 CHRISTOPER T HEID PAUL & KAREN SCHIEFERT 14093 FISHER AVE NE 14079 BLUEBIRD TRL PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JULIUS G & GAIL TADEVICH KRAIG F & MARY S GREGOR 5375 HAMPTON ST NE 14063 BLUEBIRD TRL NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JOHN D JOHNSON VINCENT & VIENGSAVANH NGUYEN 5357 HAMPTON ST NE 14047 BLUEBIRD TRL NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JEFFREY L & DENISE L BARTLETT MICHAEL MOHS 5313 HAMPTON ST NE 14031 BLUEBIRD TRL PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 ALLEN FRANCIS VALEK MAPLE HILL COMPANY LLC 5295 HAMPTON ST 12433 PRINCETON AVE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 SAVAGE MN 55378 MARK M & VIOLA A KOHOUT TODD W & JENNIFER M EBERLE 5279 HAMPTON ST NE 14014 BLUEBIRD TRL NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 MARK A VANDAALEN JESSICA L DECKER 14095 BLUEBIRD TRL 14022 BLUEBIRD TRL PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 KYLE & JEANNE KLAPHAKE DOUGLAS G FARRELL 12550 PORTLAND AV S APT 102 5286 HAMPTON ST NE BURNSVILLE MN 55337 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 WILLIAM & SHANNON WHITECOTTON CURTIS B & JANICE A OLSON 14030 BLUEBIRD TRL 8029 MARTINDALE DR PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 SHAKOPEE MN 55379 ROBERT V & LISA E TODD FREDRICK J CORRIGAN 14034 BLUEBIRD TRL 8075 MARTINDALE DR E PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 BRIAN T & KARIN L GOODWIN STEVEN D MUHLENHARDT 14038 BLUEBIRD TRL NE 7556 EAGLE CREEK BLVD PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 SHAKOPEE MN 55379 TRACY W BROWNRIGG SCOTT COUNTY HWY ENGINEER 14042 BLUEBIRD TRL NE 600 COUNTRY TRL E PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JORDAN MN 55352 MITCHELL B WALL JOHN VINCENT MARKERT 14046 BLUEBIRD TRL NE 5500 CEDARWOOD ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 WENSCO INC TODD A TREICHLER 1895 PLAYA DR STE 220 5488 CEDARWOOD ST EAGAN MN 55122 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JAMES E & ANN MARIE SANBORN THOMAS E & TAMMY L CRANER 5470 CEDARWOOD ST 14070 CANDLEWOOD IN PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 LORI GANDT JOEL J & SARAH J CARTWRIGHT 14045 CANDLEWOOD CIR NE 14092 CANDLEWOOD IN PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JUNE M BRYNE CRAIG & KAREN BUTLER 14025 CANDLEWOOD CIR NE 14106 CANDLEWOOD LN NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JOHN P & ANGELA K LARSON JAMES & PAULETTE DORTCH 14019 CANDLEWOOD IN NE 5511 CEDARWOOD ST PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 THOMAS J NELSON JOHN WALTER DOEBBER 14016 CANDLEWOOD LN NE 5497 CEDARWOOD ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 BURTON E & RITA L PETERSON EDWIN J SCHNEIDER 14030 CANDLEWOOD LN NE 5483 CEDARWOOD ST PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DAVID A LENZEN JOSE & MARIA G FRANCO 14050 CANDLEWOOD LN NE 5469 CEDARWOOD ST PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PAUL J LINDAHL CALVIN & BEVERLEY CHADWICK PO BOX 62 13755 CREST AVE NE SHAKOPEE MN 55379 - 0062 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 G W BENEKE ROY S & BARBARA L ERICKSON 2030 E IDAHO 13625 CREST AV NE ST PAUL MN 55119 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DAVID J BADEN HOLY CROSS LUTHERAN CHURCH 13866 PIKE LAKE TRL 14085 PIKE LAKE TRL NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DWAYNE B & JULIE A GARWOOD ROBERT W & LORENE GARLING 13900 PIKE LAKE TRL 4730 140 ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 KATHRYN MARSCHALL TOM & CAROL JARZYNA 3932 TONKAWOOD RD 14150 ROLLING OAKS CIR SE MINNETONKA MN 55345 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JOHN R & PHYLLIS NUGENT TIMOTHY P & MICHELE R SMITH 13855 CREST AVE NE 14100 ROLLING OAKS CIR PRIOR LAKE , MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 STEVEN J & PAULA A JENKINS MITCHELL M & MARY L S ROACH 13900 CREST AVE 14070 ROLLING OAKS CIR PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PATRICK R & MARGARET E SAMES 14030 ROLLING OAKS CIR PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 GORDON R & LAQUITA M ERICKSON 14071 ROLLING OAKS CIR NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 CURTIS & SALLY STONE 14111 ROLLING OAKS CR NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DAVID R & MARY C DURNBAUGH 14175 ROLLING OAKS CIR NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 Q AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL COUNTY OF SCOTT ) ) ss STATE OF MINNESOTA) LxAY) LUof the City of Prior Lake, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, being du SN om, says on the day of , x /n , 2001 , she served e attached list qf persons tq have an interest in the Z4jjv YLCIL%�l. IbuL -�✓` " a , by mailing to them a copy thereof, enclosed in an envelope, postage prepaid, and be depositing same in the post office at Prior Lake, Minnesota, the last known address of the parties . Subscribed and sworn to be this day of , 2000 . NOTARY PUBLIC L:\DEPTWORK\BLANKFRM\MAILAFFD.DOC PRIq ti y v � 11NN ES0� REVISED CITY OF PRIOR LAKE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE YEAR 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 23 AND 24, TOWNSHIP 115, RANGE 22 You are hereby notified that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at Prior Lake Fire Station # 1 , located at 16776 Fish Point Road, SE, on AeSday, January 16, 2001 at 6 : 30 p .m . , or as soon thereafter as possible . The purpose of the public hearing is to consider a proposal to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map for 320 acres of property located on the north side of CSAR 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 in the SE '/4 of Section 23 and the SW 1/4 of Section 24, Township 115 , Range 22 . The proposal is to amend the Land Use Map from the current R-HD (High Density Residential) designation and the C-BO (Business Office Park) designation to Rural Density . Legal Description : The Southwest 1/4 of Section 2, Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota; And The Southeast 1/4 of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should attend this public hearing . The Planning Commission will accept oral and or written comments . If you have questions regarding this matter, contact the Prior Lake Planning Department at 447-9810 . Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator City of Prior Lake Mailed on Friday, January 5 , 2001 . lA00files\00compam\00-084\rev mail note. 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 O� PRIO � _ ti Y v l 'f?1NNES0 January 10 , 2001 Stephen Kelly Bannigan & Kelly, PA 1750 North Central Life Tower 445 Minnesota Street St . Paul , MN 55101 -2132 RE : Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the January 16 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . You or your representatives are expected to attend the meeting . You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the staff report. The meeting begins at 6 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting , please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting . If you have any questions , please contact me at 4474230 . Sincerely , OLA Connie Carlson Planning Dept. Secretary Enclosure 0 1:\d ptwork\blankfrm\meetltr.doc 16200 Eag�e Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447 -4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 500' P 2d LAS Merling Cor prehensove Pan ° monclment Case � o � � ��°� O =Oo4 Location of Property Nu P p Az4mr-M, r7 C��)r17 ap • k it II O • e � r . { N NEW ABSTRACTS REGISTERED PROPERTY ABSTRACTS cbNTINI ' ATIONS TITLE INSURANCE CLOSING `SERVICE RECORDING SERVICE SCOTT COUNTY ABSTRACT AND TITLE , INC . 223 HOLMES STREET, P . O. BOX 300 SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA 55379 David Moonen and Dale Kutter Telephone: (612) 445-6246 FAX: (612) 445-0229 October 3 , 2000 Bannigan & Kelly, P . A. 1750 North Central Life Tower 445 Minnesota Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Attn : Stephen Kelly To Whom it May Concern : According to the 2000 tax records in the Scott County Treasurer' s Office, the following persons listed on Exhibit "A" are the owners of the property which lies within 500 feet of the following described property : The Southwest Quarter of Section 24, Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota and The Southeast Quarter of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota except the South 430 feet of the West 275 feet of the said Southeast Quarter and The South 430 feet of the West 275 feet of the Southeast Quarter of Section 23 , Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota. David E. Moonen President Scott County Abstract & Title, Inc. EsMK MXA=bsctor CT MEMBER MINNESOTA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION AGENT FOR CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY TERRY J & JEAN A FOSKETT ROBERT A HOBSON 5279 140 ST NE 5409 140 ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 KERRY ANN SMITH JOSEPH G & DIANE M ZIESKA 5299 140 ST NE 5316 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 MICHAEL C & LINDA L SMITH KEITH R & ANNETTE DICKIE 5313 140 ST NE 5336 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 STEVEN C THOM MARTIN N REITZ 5335 140 ST NE 5356 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 KAREN J KOSKELIN DANIEL J & LEONA J MEYER 5355 140 ST NE 5376 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JUANITA M JONES RODGER E & ELAINE D OLSON 5375 140 ST NE 5396 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 MICHAEL D LIEPOLD DAVID T & KATHLEEN M SANDVIK 5395 140 ST NE 5410 HAMPTON ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 EXH � BiT •_�• pAGE ..Z. OF ._PAGES CHRISTOPER T HEID PAUL & KAREN SCHIEFERT 14093 FISHER AVE NE 14079 BLUEBIRD TRL PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JULIUS G & GAIL TADEVICH KRAIG F & MARY S GREGOR 5375 HAMPTON ST NE 14063 BLUEBIRD TRL NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JOHN D JOHNSON VINCENT & VIENGSAVANH NGUYEN 5357 HAMPTON ST NE 14047 BLUEBIRD TRL NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JEFFREY L & DENISE L BARTLETT MICHAEL MOHS 5313 HAMPTON ST NE 14031 BLUEBIRD TRL PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 ALLEN FRANCIS VALEK MAPLE HILL COMPANY LLC 5295 HAMPTON ST 12433 PRINCETON AVE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 SAVAGE MN 55378 MARK M & VIOLA A KOHOUT TODD W & JENNIFER M EBERLE 5279 HAMPTON ST NE 14014 BLUEBIRD TRL NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 MARK A VANDAALEN JESSICA L DECKER 14095 BLUEBIRD TRL 14022 BLUEBIRD TRL PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 E Gff'..b.' PAW OF � _PAGES KYLE & JEANNE KLAPHAKE DOUGLAS G FARRELL 12550 PORTLAND AV S APT 102 5286 HAMPTON ST NE BURNSVILLE MN 55337 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 WILLIAM & SHANNON WHITECOTTON CURTIS B & JANICE A OLSON 14030 BLUEBIRD TRL 8029 MARTINDALE DR PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 SHAKOPEE MN 55379 ROBERT V & LISA E TODD FREDRICK J CORRIGAN 14034 BLUEBIRD TRL 8075 MARTINDALE DR E PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 BRIAN T & KARIN L GOODWIN STEVEN D MUHLENHARDT 14038 BLUEBIRD TRL NE 7556 EAGLE CREEK BLVD PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 SHAKOPEE MN 55379 TRACY W BROWNRIGG SCOTT COUNTY HWY ENGINEER 14042 BLUEBIRD TRL NE 600 COUNTRY TRL E PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JORDAN MN 55352 MITCHELL B WALL JOHN VINCENT MARKERT 14046 BLUEBIRD TRL NE 5500 CEDARWOOD ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 WENSCO INC TODD A TREICHLER 1895 PLAYA DR STE 220 5488 CEDARWOOD ST EAGAN MN 55122 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JAMES E & ANN MARIE SANBORN THOMAS E & TAMMY L CRANER 5470 CEDARWOOD ST 14070 CANDLEWOOD LN PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 LORI GANDT JOEL J & SARAH J CARTWRIGHT 14045 CANDLEWOOD CIR NE 14092 CANDLEWOOD LN PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JUNE M BRYNE CRAIG & KAREN BUTLER 14025 CANDLEWOOD CIR NE 14106 CANDLEWOOD LN NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JOHN P & ANGELA K LARSON JAMES & PAULETTE DORTCH 14019 CANDLEWOOD LN NE 5511 CEDARWOOD ST PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 THOMAS J NELSON JOHN WALTER DOEBBER 14016 CANDLEWOOD LN NE 5497 CEDARWOOD ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 BURTON E & RITA L PETERSON EDWIN J SCHNEIDER 14030 CANDLEWOOD LN NE 5483 CEDARWOOD ST PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DAVID A LENZEN JOSE & MARIA G FRANCO 14050 CANDLEWOOD LN NE 5469 CEDARWOOD ST PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 .EXHT A_ PAW / OF _PAGES CITY OF PRIOR LAKE RAMONA WHIPPS CITY ADMINISTRATOR 23605 DREXEL AV 16200 EAGLE CREEK AVE JORDAN MN 55352 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 US WEST INC CHARLES & JUDITH CRAMER 6300 S SYRACUSE WAY 13496 PIKE LAKE TRL UNIT 70 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 ENGLEWOOD CO 80111 TIMOTHY W & PATRICIA A BRIDE GMAC MORTGAGE 5260 CEDARWOOD ST NE 3451 HAMMOND AV PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 P . O . BOX 780 WATERLOO IA 50704 MICHAEL E & CYNTHIA L DODGE CHARLES G & CAROL L PAVLISH 5610 CEDARWOOD ST 4262 140 ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DOUGLAS W ROACH JOSEPH L KINNEY 5545 CEDARWOOD ST NE 4270 140 ST W PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSN LOT 1 PARTNERSHIP 30 9TH ST S SUE G DIRKES MPLS MN 55402 943 CEMETERY LN ASPEN CO 81611 - 1079 HAROLD D & JUDY K BOHLEN RALPH 0 & DELOYCE I GOODE 13380 HICKORY LN SE 9132 UPTON AVE S PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 BLOOMINGTON MN 55431 - PAM s OF PAGES PAUL J LINDAHL CALVIN & BEVERLEY CHADWICK PO BOX 62 13755 CREST AVE NE SHAKOPEE MN 55379 - 0062 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 G W BENEKE ROY S & BARBARA L ERICKSON 2030 E IDAHO 13625 CREST AV NE ST PAUL MN 55119 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DAVID J BADEN HOLY CROSS LUTHERAN CHURCH 13866 PIKE LAKE TRL 14085 PIKE LAKE TRI, NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DWAYNE B & JULIE A GARWOOD ROBERT W & LORENE GARLING 13900 PIKE LAKE TRL 4730 140 ST NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 KATHRYN MARSCHALL TOM & CAROL JARZYNA 3932 TONKAWOOD RD 14150 ROLLING OAKS CIR SE MINNETONKA MN 55345 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 JOHN R & PHYLLIS NUGENT TIMOTHY P & MICHELE R SMITH 13855 CREST AVE NE 14100 ROLLING OAKS CIR PRIOR LAKE , MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 STEVEN J & PAULA A JENKINS MITCHELL M & MARY L S ROACH 13900 CREST AVE 14070 ROLLING OAKS CIR PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 EXHIBIT '' PAiOE.. .. OF _PAGE° PATRICK R & MARGARET E SAMES 14030 ROLLING OAKS CIR PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 GORDON R & LAQUITA M ERICKSON 14071 ROLLING OAKS CIR NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 CURTIS & SALLY STONE 14111 ROLLING OAKS CR NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 DAVID R & MARY C DURNBAUGH 14175 ROLLING OAKS CIR NE PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 D auU 4 �� , S 4-&�-e s VI � YIi T Pr �� r�►-.., cam- -�- l � u .�-c— c.1cfS4! � a13Y IfP " f � �-r AGES. L : \ TEMPLATE\FILEINFO .DOC O� PRIG x FILE COPY U INNESO� P November 27 , 2000 Stephen Kelly Bannigan & Kelly , PA 1750 North Central Life Tower 445 Minnesota Street St. Paul , MN 55101 -2132 RE : City of Prior Lake Review for Application Completeness for Application to Amend the Comprehensive Plan Dear Mr. Kelly : On November 27 , 2000 , the City of Prior Lake determined all of the necessary submittals for the above application have been received . This letter serves as your official notification that the applications are now complete . The DRC will now begin formal review of these requests . At this time , you are tentatively scheduled for the January 16 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . I will notify you of any changes to that date . The City review process can be substantially less than 120 days , and we intend to move this matter through the process in a timely manner that provides a complete , professional review . Occasionally , however , due to meeting schedules , it is sometimes necessary to extend the 60 - day review period . This letter also serves as your official notice that the City is extending the 60 -day deadline for an additional 60 days from January 27 , 2001 to March 27 , 2001 . If you have questions relative to the review process or related issues , please contact me directly at 952-447- 9810 . Sincerely , a V < a// J ne Kansier, AICP lanning Coordinator cc : Helen , Edward , Michael & Rebecca Vierling DRC Members IA00fi1es\00compam\00-084\a.ppcom . doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Ynor Lake, Minnesota 55372 - 1714 / Ph . (612) 447 -4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 0 PRIo�P F. y v � Memorandum TO : City of Savage City of Shakopee Scott County Planning Department Prior Lake/Savage School District FROM : Jane Kansier , Planning Coordinator City of Prior Lake DATE : November 28 , 2000 RE : Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments The City of Prior Lake has received an application for the following amendment to the City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan : • An amendment to the City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation for the property located on the north side of CSAH 42 , between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 , in the SE I/4 of Section 23 and the SW '/4 of Section 24, T 115 , R 22 . The proposal would change the designation from R-HD (High Density Residential) and C -BO (Commercial Business Office Park) to Rural Density. This item is scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission on January 16 , 2001 . We would appreciate receiving any comments you have by Tuesday, January 2 , 2001 . Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions , please contact me at 952447 - 9812 . Enclosure 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\refer memo .doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (612) 447 -4230 / Fax (612 ) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER I D pwtA [Ec' EaW1E SHAKOPEE DEC a M December 1 , 2000 Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . Prior Lake, MN 55372- 1714 Dear Ms . Kansier : Thank you for your notice of proposed comprehensive plan amendment dated November 281 2000 . I do not have any comment to offer on behalf of the City of Shakopee on the proposed amendment at this time . Very ly yours, 7y� R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CC . 2000 Correspondence File COMMUMTY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South • Shakopee, Minnesota • 553794351 • 952-445-3650 • FAX 952445-6718 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE DRC PROJECT REVIEW CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME : VIERLING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT An application for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the R- HD ( High Density Residential ) designation and the C- BO ( Business Office Park) designation to the Rural Density designation on the property located in the SE '/4 of Section 23 and the SW % of Section 24 , T 115 , R 22 . APPLICANT . Helen , Edward , Michael and Rebecca Vierling CONTACT PERSON . Stephen Kelly Bannigan & Kelly , PA 651 -224-3781 SITE INFORMATION PID # : 25-923-001 -0 25-923-001 -2 25-923-015-0 25-924-003-0 LOCATION : This property is located on the north side of CSAH 42 between Pike Lake Trail and CSAH 18 . EXISTING ZONING . A (Agricultural ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN : R- HD and C- BO PROPOSED Rural Density COMPREHENSIVE PLAN , DISTRIBUTE TO : APPLICATION FOR : ♦ Frank Boyles ♦ Bud Osmundson Administrative Land Division ♦ Sue Walsh ♦ Sue McDermott ♦ Comprehensive Plan Amend . ♦ Ralph Teschner Jeff Evens Conditional Use Permit ♦ Chris Esser Lani Leichty Home Occupation ♦ Bob Hutchins Rezoning ♦ Don Rye Doug Hartman Site Plan Jane Kansier ♦ Fire Chief Preliminary Plat ♦ Bill O' Rourke PUD ♦ DNR - Pat Lynch ♦ Minnegasco Final Plat ♦ I County Hwy . Dept . ♦ Watershed Dist . Variance MNDOT ♦ Telephone Co . Vacation SMDC ♦ Electric Co . ♦ Mediacom Cable Met , Council Date Received 11 /21 /00 Date Distributed 11 /28/00 Date Due 12/12/00 Complete Application 11 /27/00 Date Distributed to 11 /28/00 DRC Meeting 12/ 14/00 Date DRC Publication Date 1 /6/01 Tentative PC Date 1 /16/01 Tentative CC 2/5/01 Date 60 Day Review Date 1 /27/01 Review Extension 3/27/01 I :\00files\OOcompam\00-084\referral . doc Page 1 I have reviewed the attached proposed request (Vierling Comprehensive Plan Amendment) for the following : Water City Code Grading Sewer Storm Water Signs Zoning Flood Plain County Road Access Parks Natural Features Legal Issues Assessment Electric Roads/Access Policy Septic System Gas Building Code Erosion Control Other Recommendation : Approval Denial Conditional Approval Comments : Signed : Date : Please return any comments by Tuesday, December 12 , 2000 , to Jane Kansier, DRC Coordinator City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Prior Lake , MN 55372 Phone : (612) 447-9812 Fax : (612) 4474245 1 :\00files\00compam\00-084\referral . doc Page 2 Memorandum To : Doug Hartmann, PW Supervisor From : Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinators Date: 1/5/01 Re : Planning Signs Please post the following signs . • Comprehensive Plan Amendment, on the north side of CSAH 42 , and on the east side of Pike Lake Trail . Please place the sign behind the right-of- way of CSAH 42 by Monday, January 8 , 2001 . (See Map) • There is a sign for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment located on the north side of CSAH 42 , just east of CSAH 18 . This sign may be removed . Thanks for your help . Please let me know if you have any questions . Lc100FILES10000MPAM10010841SIGNMEMO.DOC O� PRIO K � �?' IV NESO January 10 , 2001 The Helen Vierling Family 13985 Pike Lake Road NE Prior Lake , MN 55372 RE : Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the January 16 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . You or your representatives are expected to attend the meeting . You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the staff report. The meeting begins at 6 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting , please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting . If you have any questions , please contact me at 4474230 . incerely , 4 Connie Carlson Planning Dept . Secretary Enclosure 1:\d ptwork\blankfrm\meetltr. doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER cc� EOWE ii JAN 1 6 2001 j HAROLD D . BOHLEN 13380 Hickory Avenue p Prior Lake, MN 55372 H (952) 445-2828 January 11 , 2001 City of Prior Lake Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator Planning Department 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 Dear Ms Jane Kansier, In regards to the proposed amendment to the City of Prior Lake year 2020 comprehensive plan , for 320 acres of property located in sections 23 & 24, township 115 , range 22 , from the R- HD designation and the C-130 designation to Rural Density . I have no objection to this amendment as this would allow the Vierlings to continue to farm of which their family has done for last 100 years or so. Sincerely, Harold D . Bohlen FROM CORRIGRN , PRIOR LOKE , MN PHONE N0 . 612 445 9681 Jan . 15 2001 08 : 51PM P01 Fred & Linda C.".Orr1981) 8075 E mt Martindale Drive 1?rim• 1,alce, MN 55372 Phone/tax, 952 , 445 , 9681 VIA FAX 9524474245 Jammy 15 , 2001 Plamung Comilmsioll Oily of Prior Lake 16200 Eagdo Creek Ave. S .L. Pryor Lake) A4N 55372- i 71. 4 Dear h4cmbcm of the Pla>iuning Commissions Ttl : ' Tuesday, January 16, 2001 Plalmmi g Coln"I' Sslot) mooting Proposal to amend t]) e 2020 Comprehensive; Land Use flail Map fivi ► RwIlD and c mBO to Rural Dcoaity We ale respc»utinl; teea notice of public h001111g 1vgarding a proposal to amend 1110 2020 Conipreliensive land Usc Plan map fur 320 acres of properly located south of and adjacent to our borne on the north side of CSA .H 4.2 between Pikc Take 'frail ;ttid CSAI .1 18 . Plume tic advised that we support the 1�1'oposal to a1110d 1110 d0Signat.i () () this properly 1.0 R11ra1 l )cnslly to allow 1:111 :1 0ntlrf" property to contilluo to be operatc(l as a Palm enterprise fin' a period of eight. ,years . We do not hilend caul' support for this 1)rolu�sa1 10 pl•ejuclice any otl ) cf' (Imtelopment applical.ions that may be proposed 1,011 propc:l•ty local ed no1ih of this property In the cities of Prior Lake or Sbakopco . We apprccialC your altc;lltiorl to this 1tlattC1 , Sincerel , Tared & Limb Corrigan cc:, the Mud Frimily , c/o Swig Lo Ilim('401, K011y & 17mcdI PPA . FROM FAX NO , Jan . 16 2001 10 : 22AM P2 Lot I Partnership c/o Sue Anne Griffith 943 Cemetery Lane Aspen, CO 816114079 (970)5444633 (970)544- 8048 FAX January 16, 2001 Prior Lake Planning Commission 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S . E . Prior Lake, MN 55372- 1714 re % Amend Land Use Map to Rural Density Vierling Property Dear Planning Commission : The purpose of this letter is to support the Vierling Family ' s request to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for their property to Rural Density , This will enable them to re-enroll in the Agricultural Preserve Program , I represent Lot I partnership , a family partnership with ownership in Meadowlawn ( Section 25 Township 115 Range 022 W 1 /2 NW '/G ), the property directly south of the Vierling' s acreage in the middle . We are surrounded by urban development, both east and west . With so few remaining large tracts of land within the city limits, the need for open space in the form of agricultural lands is a necessity. I urge you to grant this requested amendment , Respectfully submitted, r!� Sue Anne Griffith, Manager Lot I Partnership JENNIFER SEVERUD 15761 Marystown Road Shakopee, MN 55379 (952) 496 =3013 January 19 , 2001 Prior Lake City Hall Attn : City Council 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . SE Prior Lake , MN 55372 Dear Prior Lake City Council : This letter is in response to the WCCO-TV story that aired on January 17 , 2001 concerning the future of family farms such as Mike and Becky Vierling ' s . I thought it might help the council to make a better-informed decision on future zoning , if you had some history and facts regarding family farms . The beginning of the 19th Century and the Industrial Revolution is when the expulsion of people off the land accelerated greatly . People did not migrate into the city ; they were driven into the city when it became economically impossible to live off the land . The practice of "pet keeping" developed as the people tried to re-establish what was being lost at an economic level and turn it into a recreational activity . Pet keeping and gardening are two of the most popular hobbies in society today . With the disappearance of the family farm, we have lost contact with growing things and taking care of animals . Children today don ' t see where their food comes from; they don ' t know how to plant seeds and grow things or see how animals are slaughtered for food. In 1910 there were still more people working the land than there were working in industry . Today, less than 2 . 5 % of the population is actively engaged in farming . One of the greatest effects of the loss of family farms on society today, is the effect on our male population . Today ' s men and boys suffer from a lack of nurturing . Young boys today are not educated to give care as they were naturally taught on family farms . Research has shown that the gentler a dairy farmer is with his cows, the greater their milk production is . Milan Kundera in his book "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" suggests that something awful happened to our society when farm animals quit being named . Take a look at some statistics in our society today : • Our prison populations are overwhelmingly male. • Only 44% of college graduates are men . • Research has shown that there is a direct correlation between animal abuse and child abuse . In my own experience in volunteering, the volunteer population is mostly female . Our society is not helping men and boys to reach their full potential as caring citizens . Jane Kansier From : Jane Kansier Sent : Thursday, January 25 , 2001 2 :44 PM To : Mike Gundlach ; Jane Kansier; Jim Ericson ; Jim Petersen ; Joe Zieska ; Wes Mader Cc : Don Rye ; Frank Boyles ; Suesan Lea Pace ( E- mail ) Subject : RE : Vierling Comprehensive Plan Amendment Mike , the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council . The Council will most likely consider this item at the 2 / 20 meeting . An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan requires a 4 / 5 vote of the Council . We have also spoken to the MPCA . They are sending us a letter . Please let me know if you have any questions . - - - - - Original Message - - - - - From : Mike Gundlach , Council Member [ mailto : mgundlach@cityofpriorlake . com ] Sent : Thursday , January 25 , 2001 1 : 57 PM Too Jane Kansier ; Jim Ericson ; Jim Petersen ; Joe Zieska ; Wes Mader Cc : Don Rye ; Frank Boyles ; Suesan Lea Pace ( E -mail ) Subject : Re : Vierling Comprehensive Plan Amendment Jane , what is the procedure here ? Does the Planning Commission make the final determination or do they make a recommendation to the Council ? Frank , what do we know about MPCA issue ? Anything new ? Mike - - - - - Original Message - - - - - From : Jane Kansier < JKansier@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> To : Jim Ericson < JEricson@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> ; Jim Petersen < jpetersen@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> ; Joe Zieska < JZieska@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> ; Mike Gundlach <Mgundlach@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> ; Wes Mader < wmader@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> Cc : Don Rye < DRye@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> ; Frank Boyles < FBoyles@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> ; Suesan Lea Pace ( E -mail ) < space@hlnsj . com> Sent : Tuesday , January 23 , 2001 2 : 33 PM Subject : Vierling Comprehensive Plan Amendment > Attached are the letters submitted by Kelly & Fawcett , P . A . , > representatives for the Vierling family . " Kellyl " is the letter sent to > neighboring property owners . " Kelly2 " is the letter submitted to the > Planning Commission the day of the meeting . This item is scheduled for > additional review by the Planning Commission on January 29 , 2001 . > Please let me know if you have any questions . < < kellyl . doc > > > < < kelly2 . doc > > 1 PR to DEMO; ANDUM _ dj1NNES0 January 26 , 2001 TO : The Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM : Frank Boyles , City Manager SUBJECT : Vierling Agricultural Preserve Request Attached are some materials I thought you might find useful when this item is heard by the City Council (probably Feb . 201`') . You should have already received by e - mail Mr . Kelly ' s letter to neighbors and this letter we received the day of the Planning Commission meeting . 1 . Auqu- t 11 , 2000 memo and Auaust 15, 2000 letter from Don Rye . In this correspondence , Don lays out the rationale for believing the land no longer qualifies for agricultural preserve status . Suesan concurs with Don ' s reasoning . 2 . Property Tax analysis _ At Mayor Mader' s request , I asked Ralph to do the attached analysis . As you can see , if the Vierling property were zoned residential and presumably developed as such , it would generate $ 127 , 244 annually in taxes . I asked Ralph to calculate this for comparison only . If the property is agricultural and homesteaded , it pays $ 7011 annually or $22 . 47 per acre . If the same property is homesteaded agricultural property and enrolled in green acres , it pays $4990 annually or $2021 less than agricultural property within green acres . This is $ 15 . 99 per acre per year. If the property is homesteaded agricultural property , in green acres and in agricultural preserve , the total annual taxes are $4522 or $468 less than if it were not in agricultural preserve . This is $ 14 . 49 per acre per year . Please keep this information confidential. If you would like us to prepare additional information , please let me know . 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (612) 447 -4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER O� P R job v � AIINNESpt P MEMORANDUM August 11 , 2000 To : Frank Boyles From : Don Rye Subject : Vierling Agricultural Preserve At the August 7 Council meeting, Stephen Kelly appeared at the forum on behalf of the Vierling family and spoke concerning the Vierling ' s request to reinstate the Agricultural Preserve designation on their property north of County Road 42 . This was in response to a letter I sent Mr. Kelly (copy attached) indicating that it was my belief that the property was no longer eligible for such designation . This letter was in reply to a request from Mr. Kelly that the agricultural preserve designation be reinstated . I based this conclusion on Minnesota Statutes 473H . 04 , Subd . 2 (copy attached) , that states the conditions upon which eligibility for agricultural preserve designation will be terminated and a conversation with Suesan Pace . Suesan concurred with my conclusion . The statute says that eligibility shall be terminated when the property is no longer guided for long term agricultural use and the zoning permits residential densities greater than one unit per 40 acres . In this case, the property is guided for High Density residential use and the zoning permits residential development at a density of one unit per 10 acres . Based on these facts, it seems clear that the property is not eligible for reinstatement as an agricultural preserve . Perhaps Suesan should call Mr. Kelly and explain our position in greater detail . 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447 -4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 0 PRION A�kv e ti v � NESo P August 15 , 2000 Mr . Stephen Kelly Attorney at Law Bannigan and Kelly, P . A . 1750 North Central Life Tower 445 Minnesota Street Saint Paul, MN. 55101 -2132 Dear Mr. Kelly : This is a follow-up to my letter of August 2 concerning the request of the Vierlings to re- enroll their property as an agricultural preserve . I believe you received the letter from the Scott County attorney indicating the County did not intend to become involved in this matter and it would be up to the City to take any necessary action . I have reviewed your request with the City attorney and have the following comments . The City is prohibited by statute (Minnesota Statutes 473H . 04, Subd . 2) from re- enrolling property that is designated on its Comprehensive Plan if it is not guided for long-term agricultural use . The City does not intend to approve the request for re- enrollment for the following reasons : • On March 22 , 1999 , the City held a public hearing on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Prior Lake . This Plan included land use designations for all property in the City. The Vierling property was variously designated for Business Office park use and high-density residential use . At that hearing, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the Plan to the City Council . • On April 5 , 1999 , the City Council adopted the Plan subject to review and approval by the Metropolitan Council . • On November 3 , 1999 , the Metropolitan Council approved the plan and it became the official adopted Comprehensive Plan for the City of Prior Lake . • In a conversation with Victoria Dupre ' of the Metropolitan Council, she indicated that the City Council action in adopting the Comprehensive Plan by resolution 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372-. 1714 / Ph . (612) 447 -4230 / Fax (612) 447 -4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER had the effect of de- certifying the property for continued participation in the agricultural preserve program. • Minnesota Statutes 473H. 04, Subd . 2 provides that " . . . land shall cease to be eligible for designation as an agricultural preserve when the comprehensive plan and zoning have been amended so that the land is no longer planned for long term agricultural use and is no longer zoned for long term agricultural use as evidenced by a maximum residential density permitting more than one unit per 40 acres . " As noted, the property has been guided for business and high density residential uses and the current zoning allows one unit per 10 acres . Eligibility for inclusion in the program has ceased due to inability to comply with the statutory criteria. Upon expiration of the agricultural preserve designation next year, the Vierling ' s may wish to consider having the property enrolled in the Green Acres program. Sincerely Donald Rye Planning Director i VIERLING PROPERTY TAX ANALYSIS *******In this analysis , the limited market value is removed for comparison RESIDENTIAL ( HOMESTEAD ) Residential Residential PID Acreage Market Value Property Tax 25-923-001 -0 60 $ 1 , 2001000 $ 27 , 464 25-923-015-0 92 $ 11840 , 000 $ 36 ,420 25-924-003-0 160 $ 31200 , 000 $ 63 , 360 $ 127 , 244 AGRICULTURAL ( HOMESTEAD) Agricultural Agricultural PID Acreage Market Value Property Tax 25-923-001 -0 60 $ 159 , 000 $ 1 , 986 25-923-015-0 92 $ 194 , 900 $ 11722 25-924-003-0 160 $ 375 , 800 $ 31303 $ 7 , 011 AGRICULTURAL ( HOMESTEAD) (GREEN ACRES ) Agricultural Agricultural PID Acreage Market Value Property Tax 25-923-001 -0 60 $ 1452300 $ 11785 25-923-015-0 92 $ 118 , 600 $ 11045 25-924-003-0 160 $ 245 , 700 $ 21160 $ 4 , 990 AGRICULTURAL ( HOMESTEAD) (GREEN ACRES ) (AG PRESERVE) Agricultural Agricultural PID Acreage Market Value Property Tax 25-923-001 -0 60 $ 145 , 300 $ 1 , 695 25-923-015-0 92 $ 118 ,600 $ 907 25-924-003-0 160 $ 245 , 700 $ 11920 $ 4 , 522 Kelly & Fawcett , P . A . ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 PATRICK J. KELLY Of Counsel: SONG LO FAWCETT JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR, STEPHEN KELLY MCGUIGAN & HOLLY, P.L.C. SIA LO CHAD D. LEMMONS (651 ) 224-3781 KATHLEEN M. LOUCKS Facsimile (651 ) 223-8019 ROBERT J. FOWLER &Mail : kelfawcett@gwest. net January 29 , 2001 Iter . Frank Boyles City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Southeast Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 BY FACSIMILE AND UNITED STATES MAIL Re : Case File 400- 084 Dear Mr . Boyles : The Firm of Kelly & Fawcett, P . A . represents the Vierling Family . Pursuant to the Minnesota Data Practices Act; please provide us a copy of. 1 . all data concerning the above file ; 2w all notes , memorandums , facsimiles , e-mails, voice mails , etc , sent by anyone and received or sent to the Planning Commission, City Council, or any employee , agent, subsidiary , or board of the City of Prior Lake on the above matter. If you have any questions please call . Respectfully yours, KELLY & FAWCETT, P .A. Patrick J . Kelly Chad D . Lemmons cc : Helen Vierling Ed Vierling Michael and Becky Vierling Kelly & Fawcett , P . A . ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 PATRICK J. KELLY Of Counsel: SONG LO FAWCETT JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR. STEPHEN KELLY MCGUIGAN & HOLLY, P.L.C. SIA LO CHAD D. LEMMONS (651 ) 224-3781 KATHLEEN M. LOUCKS Facsimile (651 ) 223-8019 ROBERT J. FOWLER E-Mail: kelfawcett@gwest.net January 29 , 2001 City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave Prior Lake ,MN 55372 Re : Bannigan & Kelly Name Change Dear Friends : Please note that our name along with our address has changed effective 11 /06/00 . Our new name and address is as follows : Kelly & Fawcett, P .A. 2350 USBank Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar St St . Paul, MN 55101 Our phone and fax numbers remain the same. Our new &mail address is : kelfawcett@qwest . net . Please change the address of all our attorneys listed on this letterhead except McGuigan and Holly. If you have any questions on any of this or require more information, please call me at 651 -224- 3781 . Thank you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely, Colleen Hermes Control Accountant r , Minn st Ilu i n Control Agency February 11 2001FEB — rJ 2001 Ei Mr. Don Rye City of Prior Lake - 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Southeast Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE : Status of the Water Quality Pollution Issues with the Vierling Farm, Prior Lake, MN Dear Mr. Rye : Pursuant to our January 24 , 2001 , telephone conversation regarding the Vierling Farm (Farm) site, located in the southeast quarter of Section 23 , Eagle Creek Township , Scott County, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has compiled an environmental regulatory status letter at your request . The Vierling farm has a long history with the MPCA regarding point and non-point source water quality runoff issues . The Farm is located along the shore of Pike Lake . The pasture area adjacent to the farmstead is located on a steep slope across the road from Pike Lake . A metal culvert beneath the road allows surface water runoff to flow from the hillside pasture directly into Pike Lake , The Farm uses the hillside area to pasture cows which results in manure and manure-contaminated surface water runoff to flow either through the culvert into Pike Lake, or, in the event the culvert is obstructed, over the road and into Pike Lake . The Farm is currently operating without an MPCA feedlot permit . A number of corrective actions are available to the Farm to correct the water quality runoff issues . The corrective action options include such practices vegetative filter strip measures to moving the operation to a different location. However, the Farm must make a decision regarding this issue as the MPCA is in the process of designating the Farm as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation under the Clean Water Act . In 1998 ) the Minnesota Legislature directed the MPCA to issue National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits to those feedlots with over 1 , 000 animal units (AU) , otherwise known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO) . Those feedlots that have between 300 AU and 1000 AU, and either discharges directly into waters of the state or through a man-made conveyance are also considered a CAFO ; therefore, requiring a NPDES permit. Under certain circumstances it may also be necessary and appropriate to require a feedlot with less than 300 AU to be obtain a NPDES permit. First the feedlot must be designated a CAFO, which is done on a case-by- case basis following set procedures and criteria outlined in Code of 520 Lafayette Rd . N . ; St . Paul , MN 551554194 ; (651 ) 296- 6300 (Voice ) ; ( 651 ) 292 - 5332 (TTY) St . Paul Brainerd • Detroit Lakes • Duluth • Mankato • Marshall • Rochester • Willmar; www. pca . state . mn . us Equal Opportunity Employer • Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20% fibers from paper recycled by consumers . Mr. Don Rye Page Two Feder al . Regulafions , Chapter 40 , Section 122 . 23 (c) . Since Minnesota has delegation to administer the NPDES program, the Commissioner of the MPCA has the ability to designate a feedlot a CAFO if it meets all the criteria. A copy of the criteria is enclosed with this correspondence . The MPCA has conducted a site inspection of the Farm as part of the CAFO designation process . The MPCA will meet in March 2001 , to determine if the facility should be designated a CAFO in light of the MPCA inspection results . If you have any questions or comments , please feel free to contact me at (651 ) 296 - 8632 . Sincerely, James E . Sullivan Project Leader Compliance and Enforcement Section Community/Area Wide Program JS : dmb cc : Robert Roche, Assistant Attorney General Steve Jann, Environmental Protection Agency/Region 5 Kate Brigman, MPCA/Mankato Katherine Logan, MPCA/Rochester Pat Mader, MPCA/Saint Paul MPCA Feedlot File Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Designation of Feedlots as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation In 1998 the Legislature directed the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to issue National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits to those feedlots with over 1000 animal units (AU) , otherwise known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO) . Those feedlots that have between 300 AU and 1000 AU, and either discharges directly into waters of the state or through a man-made conveyance are also considered a CAFO ; therefore requiring a NPDES permit . Under certain circumstances it may also be necessary and appropriate to require a feedlot with less than 300 AU to be obtain a NPDES permit . First the feedlot must be designated a CAFO , which is done on a case-by- case basis following set procedures and criteria outlined in Code of Federal Regulations , Chapter 40 , Section 122 . 23 (c) . Since Minnesota has delegation to administer the NPDES program, the Commissioner of the MPCA has the ability to designate a feedlot a CAFO if it meets all the criteria. The MPCA is in the process of developing CAFO designation procedures, using the designation criteria 40 CFR 122 . 23 (c) . The following are the factors that shall be considered . A . 1 . The size of the feedlot operation and the amount of wastes reaching waters of the state . 2 . The location of the feedlot operation relative to waters of the state . 3 . The means of conveyance of animal wastes and/or process waste waters into waters if the state . 4 . The slope, vegetation, rainfall, and other factors affecting the likelihood or frequency of discharge of animal wastes and/or process waste waters into the waters of the state . 5 . Other relevant factors . [e . g . , value of the receiving water and its sensitivity to the pollutant load coming from the feedlot, long term consequences of this pollutant load on these waters] Be A feedlot with less than 300 animal units may be designated a CAFO if: a. pollutants are discharged into waters of the state through any manmade ditch, flushing system, or other similar manmade device or conveyance ; or 5/ 17/99 b . pollutants are discharged directly into waters of the state which originate outside of the facility and pass over, across, or through the facility or otherwise come into direct contact with animals confined in the operation . C . An on-site inspection shall be conducted prior to the feedlot being designated a CAFO . CAFO ' s will be regulated under the NPDES permit program. Once an inspection is performed, any staff recommendation to designate the feedlot as a CAFO shall be forwarded to the Commissioner or appropriate delegated staff with justification for this designation . When it has been determined that a feedlot may meet the designation criteria outlined above, staff should refer to the guidance document, "Process for Designating a Feedlot as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation, " on how to proceed with the designation process . 5/ 17/99 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Process for Designating a Feedlot as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation The following steps outline the process of how a feedlot will be designated a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) on a case-by- case basis . 1 . Identifying Feedlot as Potential CAFO The first step is for Feedlot staff to identify feedlots under 300 animal units as potential candidates for CAFO designation. . The process of identifying CAFO candidates will vary and are too numerous to document . Staff will need to be familiar with the designation criteria in the event they come across a feedlot that may be a candidate for designation. The staff familiar with the feedlot will review CAFO designation criteria and determine it the feedlot meets designation criteria . If the staff believes the feedlot could be designated a CAFO , the staff will present the case to feedlot staff at a weekly Feedlot Permit Forum . 2 . Permit Forum During one of the Feedlot Permit Forums , feedlot staff will present the details of the feedlot. As a group, the Forum will determine whether the feedlot in question warrants further investigation, including an inspection and the application of the federal criteria to the inspection' s findings . If the information presented indicates that the process should continue, a site inspection will be performed . 1) A letter will be sent to the feedlot owner informing them of the inspection and it' s purpose . 3 . Inspection of Feedlot Prior to the inspection a letter will be sent to the owner stating the reason for the inspection is to determine if the feedlot meets the CAFO designation. criteria. A copy of the designation criteria shall be included, as well as any information that will help explain the implications of the potential designation and the NPDES permit process in general . Experienced feedlot staff will be the pool of inspectors . Minimum of two inspectors will conduct inspection. The inspection should be documented on the MPCA Feedlot Inspection Report or other appropriate forms to ensure complete documentation. 4 . Permit Forum After the inspection, the Feedlot Permit Forum will then apply the findings of the inspection, as well as any other applicable information, to the designation criteria to determine whether a formal designation of the facility as a CAFO is necessary. If the Forum agrees that the feedlot should be designated as a CAFO , the process will continue 5/ 17/99 on to Step 5 . If the Forum determines that the feedlot does not meet the designation criteria, a letter will be sent to the owner stating that the feedlot does not meet designation criteria, however the owner must submit a permit application, if he has not already done so , for a permit to correct pollution problems that may exist . 5 . Produce Findings of Fact If the Feedlot Permit Forum decides that the feedlot should be designated as a CAFO , staff will prepare a Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Order (Order) for issuance by the Commissioner or the appropriate designated staff. The Findings portion of the Order will include , but not limited to , the information outlined in Attachment 1 . During this process staff will send a letter to the feedlot owner explaining the MPCA ' s intent to designated their feedlot as a CAFO . The letter should include : • an outline of how the owner has the opportunity to send the MPGA any information or evidence that may be relevant to this determination ; • a copy of the inspection report ; • the number of days the owner has to respond or submit comments to be included in the Findings . Any information that is sent in will be included in the Order' s Findings , 6 . Issue Final Order Designating the Feedlot a CAFO Route the Order and letter up through the Administrative Chain for signature by the Commissioner or appropriate designated staff. Ensure EPA Region 5 is copied on the letter. Include in the letter . • a copy of Findings of Fact. • that the owner must submit an application for a NPDES permit within 30 days of receipt of the letter. After such designation is made on a feedlot, public information documents shall be prepared to notify the public that the feedlot is considered a significant discharger to waters of the State and is being regulated under the federal clean water act and state water quality rules . 5/ 17/99 Attachment 1 Findings of Fact The Finding of Fact will include, but not limited to, the following items : a history of the site ; how the site was considered to be designated copy of letter(s) sent to owner process of how owner can submit relevant information time frame of when information must be submitted information sent in by the feedlot owner copy of the inspection report decisions made conclusions order 5/ 17/99 Kelly , & Pace . P . A . MAP A * T O R N $ Y S A T L A w 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 44d CEDAR S'T'REET SAINT PAUL, MN 5S 1 o T PATRICK J. KII Y CK Counsel= SWG LO FAWCStt TOF F. BANNIGAN, lit =FM KELLY mmUtGAN & ROILY, P.L.C. Sth LO ' CHAD D. LEMMONS (631 ) 224-3781 KATHIE1rNM LOUCIG5 FacsgWle (6511273.8019 ROMT J. POVIM E-Mail: kelfirwcettCgwest.net FAX COVER SHEET CONFIDENTIAL The irtfarmation contained in this facsimile message is attorney privileged and confidenaial intended only for the use of the individual or entity named y below. If the reader of this meisage is not the intended recipient, you arc hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communreazion is strictly prohibited. Ifyou have received this communication to ermr, please immediately notify us by telephone. TO : -�" FROM: DATE : /1a�� NO . of PAGES (includes this Paize) v Comments : 2riaA: fe 51 Tf you have any questions concerning this fax. please call 651-224_3781 E5o- d ED/ 10 ' d 109=1 AIM ONV NVDINNV9-woad wdgo : Zl la - Eo -ga � Kelly & Fa�%ceft . P . A . A T T O R Nm E Y S AT LAW 2350 PIPER IANMAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR MEET SAINT PAUL, NN 55101 PA'rhiCY I Y.'ELl_\' ofa*mR°L• soNGL.O FAw= 70gN F• $.A t TNICa4N ]it, CTECf�N'T�ZY 1I[.C9i7IQAN � I�C7I1.Y. P1.C. SLS�.O CURD D. MN0401' B [GS 1) ?2d37C 1 y.ATWXENT2CLOGC= �, tID {GS1 ) 2i3�o19 aysawi. 0 February 8 , 2001 TrMai1: kelfa�ect#fa�qu+estnet City of Prior Lake Planning Commission 4 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S E l _ I Prior Lake, MN 55372 rcp 820 U RE : Vierling Application Dear Cornmissioners: In response to the Planning Report prepared by the staff, I would first like to point out that our letter of lanuary 15 , 2001 was based upon facts and statements contained in the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan- In fact, our letter cites the pages and maps from which the informatiorn was obtained . As to our concerns regarding the City's infrastructure, they still exist . In planning for the future sanitary sewer capacity, the Comprehensive Plan assumes 2,600 new households will be created between now and the year 2010, Table 7-4 on page 255 . In the case of planning for new water capacity, the Comprehensive Plan assumes 2000 new households will be created between now and 2010, see page 271 which refers to Table 3 -9 on page 8. 1 . High density residential zoning allows for 30 units per acre_ While it is unrealistic to expect the density of the Vierling parcel to be that high; even at 20 units per acre, 2t3rds of the maximum density, development of the Vierling parcel would result in 3 , 200 new units . Even if no other new housing was constructed 117 Prior Lake, the planned increase for sewer and water capacity would still not allow complete development of the Vierling parcel by the year 2010 . One final point regarding sanitary sewer. The Vierling parcel still lies outside the MUSA line. While the staff report states that the City has the right to allocate capacity to any parcel it chooses within the City boundaries, our engineer indicates that the City can't ignore the MUSA boundary line and would have to seek permssion to service property outside the MUSA line . With regard to traffic, the staff report indicates that CSAH 42 has the capacity for an additional 14, 000 daily trips and that CSAR 18 has capacity for an additional 4, 000 daily trips . Developing the Vierling farts to its maximum density would use up quite a bit of this capacity. Assuming two trips per day developing the residential portion of the Vierling parcel alone would result in 9,600 E90 - 1 Eo/ ZO * d 109 =1 A113N ONV NVSINNVO= Mo wdV0 * Zl lo - eo - ga � City of Prior Lake February 8 , 2001 Page Two y new daily trips . This leaves little capacity available to handle increased traffic created by the development of surrounding parcels. Taking aU this into gccounnt, the infrastructure does not exist to allow complete development of the vierling farm over the next 10 years As to protection of open spaces. the testimony of the neighbors at the January heating makes it clear that they prefer the property remain as farmland. It seems that many of the neighbors enjoy living next to an operating farm. leo high density residential development or office park could hope to maintain the same percentage of open space as exists on a working farm. Finally, the staff report misses the point as to why the V'ierlings wish to maintain Ag Preserve status It is not merely to maintain agricultural status for real estate tax purposes . The same result could be obtained by requesting Green Acres status. The true reason are the protections that Agricultural Preserve status grants the owner. First, any rules and regulations which would interfere With the farming operation cannot be enforced. Second, the City's right to eminent domain is also restricted. These last two protections are the big reason why the Vierlitngs wish to t retain Agricultural Preserve status& raises the question of or not the property will The staff report also retain its Agricultural Preserve status indefinitely. In speaking with our clients, itis my understanding that they do intend to initiate the 8 year opt out provision immediately if they obtain Agricultural Preserve status. However, you should know that this position is not unanimous and that some of the family members are considering retaining Agricultural Preserve status indeftttitely . It is still out position that the City is not ready for the orderly developmentof the vierling parcel . Allowing the Vierlittgs to retain Agricultural Preserve status time which would grants n t e bestinterest of needed to develop a complete plan for orderly development both the City and the Vierlings Respectfully yours, KELLY & FAWCETC, P.A. Gam/ Chad D . Lernmons CDL/sjh cc : Ed vierling Helen vierling Mr . * and Ctrs . Mike vierling ego-d eo/eo d 105-1 4113H aNV WI NNV9-woad wdSo � Zl le - en -qad Kelly & Fawcett , P . A . Kelly ATT O R N' E Y S AT LAW 2350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET FEB " 9 2001 SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 PATRICK J. ALLY OfCnun'srl: S;ON sLO FAti'CETT JOBNTF. BAINTMGAN, JR. STEPHEN KBUY MCGIMIIAN & HOLLY$ P.L.C . STd7A 04AD D . LENLNIONS (6ti1) 224-3791 hATHLEEN T.A. LOUCKS Faestna (651) 2234014 ROBERT J. FOWLER February 8 , 2001 E-Mail: kelfawcetc@..q est.net City of Prior Lake Planning Commission 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S . E . Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE : Vierling Application Dear Commissioners : In response to the Planning Report prepared by the staff, I would first like to point out that our letter of January 15 , 2001 was based upon facts and statements contained in the City' s 2020 Comprehensive Plan. In fact, our letter cites the pages and maps from which the information was obtained . As to our concerns regarding the City' s infrastructure, they still exist . In planning for the future sanitary sewer capacity, the Comprehensive Plan assumes 2, 600 new households will be created between now and the year 2010 , Table 74 on page 255 . In the case of planning for new water capacity, the Comprehensive Plan assumes 2000 new households will be created between now and 2010, see page 271 which refers to Table 3 -9 on page 81 . High density residential zoning allows for 30 units per acre . While it is unrealistic to expect the density of the Vierling parcel to be that high; even at 20 units per acre, 2/3rds of the maximum density, development of the Vierling parcel would result in 3 ,200 new units . Even if no other new housing was constructed in Prior Lake, the planned increase for sewer and water capacity would still not allow complete development of the Vierling parcel by the year 2010 . One final point regarding sanitary sewer . The Vierling parcel still lies outside the NWSA line . While the staff report states that the City has the right to allocate capacity to any parcel it chooses within the City boundaries, our engineer indicates that the City can't ignore the MUSA boundary line and would have to seek permission to service property outside the WSA line . With regard to traffic, the staff report indicates that CSAH 42 has the capacity for an additional 14, 000 daily trips and that CSAH 18 has capacity for an additional 4, 000 daily trips . Developing the Vierling farm to its maximum density would use up quite a bit of this capacity . Assuming two trips per day developing the residential portion of the Vierling parcel alone would result in 9 , 600 City of Prior Lake February 8 , 2001 Page Two new daily trips . This leaves little capacity available to handle increased traffic created by the development of surrounding parcels . Taking all this into account, the infrastructure does not exist to allow complete development of the Vierling farm over the next 10 years . As to protection of open spaces, the testimony of the neighbors at the January hearing makes it clear that they prefer the property remain as farmland . It seems that many of the neighbors enjoy living next to an operating farm. No high density residential development or office park could hope to maintain the same percentage of open space as exists on a working farm. Finally, the staff report misses the point as to why the Vierlings wish to maintain Ag Preserve status . It is not merely to maintain agricultural status for real estate tax purposes . The same result could be obtained by requesting Green Acres status . The true reason are the protections that Agricultural Preserve status grants the owner . First, any rules and regulations which would interfere with the farming operation cannot be enforced . Second, the City's right to eminent domain is also restricted . These last two protections are the big reason why the Vierlings wish to retain Agricultural Preserve status . The staff report also raises the question of whether or not the property will retain its Agricultural Preserve status indefinitely. In speaking with our clients, it is my understanding that they do intend to initiate the 8 year opt out provision immediately if they obtain Agricultural Preserve status . However, you should know that this position is not unanimous and that some of the family members are considering retaining Agricultural Preserve status indefinitely . It is still our position that the City is not ready for the orderly development of the Vierling parcel . Allowing the Vierlings to retain Agricultural Preserve status for the farm grants them the time needed to develop a complete plan for orderly development which would be in the best interest of both the City and the Vierlings . Respectfully yours, KELLY & FAWCETT, P.A. Chad D . Lemmons CDL/sjh > > From : Bud Osmundson > > Sent : Friday , February 09 , 2001 1 : 05 PM > > To : Frank Boyles > > Cc : Sue McDermott > > Subject : FW : MPCA Lawsuit > > Frank . > > Forgot to bring this up to you this morning . > > What should our direction be on this ? Do you want us to write a > > letter on city letterhead to be used in this matter ? We can and will , > > but I thought we should run it by you . Please let one of us know . > > Thanks . > > Bud > > - - - Original Message - - - > > From : Lani Leichty > > Sent : Monday , February 05 , 2001 11 : 22 AM > > To : Bud Osmundson > > Cc : Sue McDermott ; Doug Hartman > > Subject : MPCA Lawsuit > > Bud , > > Dave Moran called me on 1 - 31 - 01 and mentioned the pending lawsuit > > filed by the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy ( MCEA ) > > against the MPCA . This is in regards to the MPCA ' s lack of action > > against the Vierling ' s for the manure runoff into Pike Lake . He asked > > me if the City would be willing to be part of the lawsuit against the > > MPCA , since it is a water quality issue . I said that I couldn ' t make > > that decision , but that Frank or the Mayor would be the one ' s to > > decide that . Dave mentioned that the MCEA would like a letter , in the > > future , from the City stating the maintenance required after periods > > of heavy rain in order to clean up the road , ditch , culverts . etc . > > The MCEA is planning to file the lawsuit after the spring rains or > > sometime in June . > > Lani Jane Kansier From . Jane Kansier Sent : Thursday , February 22 , 2001 8 : 29 AM To : Frank Boyles Cc : Don Rye Subject : RE : VIERLING AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REQUEST The application fee is intended to cover staff time , etc . There are no Met Council fees . The ordinance allows us to charge the applicant for any attorney ' s fees , for example , if Suesan needed to prepare an agreement or something special . - - - - - Original Message - - - - - From : Frank Boyles Sent : Monday , February 19 , 2001 8 : 40 AM To : Jane Kansier Subject : FW : VIERLING AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REQUEST Jane are they responsible for this anyway ? - - - - - Original Message - - - - - From : Mike Gundlach , Council Member [ mailto : mgundlach@cityofpriorlake . com ] Sent : Saturday , February 17 , 2001 9 : 51 AM To : Frank Boyles Subject : Re : VIERLING AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REQUEST Frank , another thought . . . . . . Ask Kelly if he is willing to absorb the costs ( actual ) for amending the comp plan . Staff time , Met council submission , Suesan Pace ' s time . I bet he wont , but hey , he ' s making the demand to change it , not us . Mike Perhaps this has already been addressed , but I think they should pay it all , especially since they can afford a battery of attorney ' s , court reporter etc . - - - - - Original Message From : Frank Boyles < FBoyles@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> To : Mike Gundlach <Mgundlach@CityofPRIORLAKE . com> Sent : Friday , February 16 , 2001 5 : 33 PM Subject : FW : VIERLING AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REQUEST > Mike let ' s see what happens . Frank > > - - - - - Original Message - - - - - > > From : Frank Boyles > > Sent : Friday , February 16 , 2001 5 : 33 PM > > To : ' kelfaucett@qwest . net ' > > Subject : VIERLING AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REQUEST > > Mr . Pat Kelly : At a recent Prior Lake Planning Commission Hearing on > > the above referenced request I understand that you offered on behalf > > of your client to voluntarily limit the duration of the Agricultural > > Preserve status of the property to a ten years from the date of > > council approval . I have been asked to request that commitment from > > you in writing . Please advise me if and when such a letter might be > > ready . If you have questions I am available by E - Mail or phone 1 PR ,to I �' NES0 February 22 , 2001 Attorney Stephen Kelly Kelly & Fawcett , PA 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street St. Paul , MN 55101 RE : Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the February 26 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . You or your representatives are expected to attend the meeting . You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the staff report . The meeting begins at 6 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting , please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting . If you have any questions , please contact me at 4474230 . Sincerely , Connie Carlson Planning Dept . Secretary Enclosure I:\deptwork\blan kfrm\meetltr.doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447 -4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER A r� P fLII1, NES0S February 7 , 2001 The Helen Vierling Family 13985 Pike Lake Trail Prior Lake MN 55372 RE : Agenda Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda for the February 12 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . You or your representatives are expected to attend the meeting . The report I sent you for the last meeting is the same , the date has been changed and I forwarded it on to Mr. Kelly . You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the staff report. The meeting begins at 6 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting , please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting . If you have any questions , please contact me at 447-4230 . Sincerely , Connie Carlson Planning Dept , Secretary Enclosure I :\deptwork\blankfrm\meetltr.doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 4474230 / Fax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER �� PRIO . ` 1P x �?INNES0 February 7 , 2001 Attorney Stephen Kelly Kelly & Fawcett, PA 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street St. Paul , MN 55101 RE : Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the February 12 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . You or your representatives are expected to attend the meeting . You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the staff report. The meeting begins at 6 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting , please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting . If you have any questions , please contact me at 4474230 . Sincerely , Connie Carlson Planning Dept , Secretary Enclosure I :\deptwork\blankfrm\meetltr.doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 4474230 / Fax (952) 4474245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER JI �� PRIG P rLIIN N E S O� January 24 , 2001 The Helen Vierling Family 13985 Pike Lake Trail Prior Lake MN 55372 RE : Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the January 29 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . You or your representatives are expected to attend the meeting . You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the staff report. The meeting begins at 6 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting , please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting . If you have any questions , please contact me at 4474230 . Sincerely , qz)l ' ^ t Connie Carlson Planning Dept . Secretary Enclosure J :\dpp ork\ lankfrm\ eetltr.doc 16200 tap C ree� Ave . 9E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 553724714 / Ph . (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN FOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER � PR j0 �jNNESp'S January 24 , 2001 Stephen Kelly Bannigan & Kelly , PA 1750 North Central Life Tower 445 Minnesota Street St . Paul , MN 55101 -2132 RE : Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the January 29 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . You or your representatives are expected to attend the meeting . You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the staff report . The meeting begins at 6 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting , please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting . If you have any questions , please contact me at 4474230 . Sincerely , q Connie Carlson Planning Dept , Secretary Enclosure 9 I :\deptwork\blankfrm\meetltr.doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER O� PRION ti � x U L � �IINNESO A February 22 , 2001 The Helen Vierling Family 13985 Pike Lake Trail Prior Lake , MN 55372 RE : Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the February 26 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . You or your representatives are expected to attend the meeting . You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the staff report . The meeting begins at 6 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting , please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting . If you have any questions , please contact me at 4474230 . Sincerely , Connien Planning Dept . Secretary Enclosure I:\deptwork\blankfrm\meetitr.doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 4474245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER O� PRIO _ ti . v x P INNESO� February 22 , 2001 Attorney Stephen Kelly Kelly & Fawcett , PA 2350 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street St . Paul , MN 55101 RE : Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the February 26 , 2001 Planning Commission meeting . You or your representatives are expected to attend the meeting . You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the staff report . The meeting begins at 6 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting , please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting . If you have any questions , please contact me at 4474230 . Sincerely , a Connie Carlson Planning Dept , Secretary Enclosure I :\deptwork\bla nkfrm\meetltr.doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER February 26 , 2001 Councilor Mike Gundlach Prior Lake City Council 16961 Simpkins Circle Prior Lake , MN 55372 Dear Mike , I have been asked by the Vierling family for support in their effort to save the Agricultural Preserve status of their farm . I understand the process of planning and how local units of government coordinate with the Metropolitan Council . And I fully recognize that this land is under the jurisdiction of the City of Prior Lake . This letter , therefore , reflects my personal point of view . Over the years , feedback from citizens has indicated great support for local control of local issues . Many residents in our community have expressed their support of the Vierling family in trying to keep farming their land . Indeed , any farming operations in or around Prior Lake certainly gives a unique component to our community because of the ever- increasing land development . The decision you face is difficult because of the comprehensive plan adopted by the City . Issues with conflicting viewpoints often require extra efforts at meaningful dialog and sincere communication . I urge you and the other members of the Council to continue discussions with the Vierling family in hopes that you can reach an agreement that is acceptable to both sides . Such an agreement might set out a time frame which would allow the Agricultural Preserve status until the land uses around this property are no longer compatible with a farming operation . Best wishes to you for a successful negotiation of this issue . Sincerely, Barbara Marschall 6701 Rustic Road Prior Lake , MN 55372 cc : Mayor Wes Mader q c( ? Councilor Jim Petersen Councilor Jim Ericson Councilor Joe Zieska Michael and Rebecca Vierling PAUL D . WELLSTONE COMMITTEES : MINNESOTA LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES SMALL BUSINESS MINNESOTA TOLL FREE NUMBER: (� (� (� INDIAN AFFAIRS �11 \� 1-800-642-604 , 1tEdtate,V senate (l VETERANS' AFFAIRS WASHINGTON , DC 20510-2303 FOREIGN RELATIONS February 28 , 2001 Mr . Wesley Mader, Mayor City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Prior Lake , MN 55372 - 1714 Dear Mayor Mader : I am writing to express some serious concerns about plans to obtain and develop farm property V/ currently owned by Helen Vierling and operated by Mike Vierling . I understand that the City of Prior Lake plans to annex this property for residential and commercial development . I ask that ✓ you give strong consideration to a number of reasons to oppose those proposals . The Vierling Family has protected this property by including it in an agricultural reserve . That protection expires on March 3 , 2001 . The Vierling Family , supported by a significant portion of their immediate community , wish to continue farming the land. I understand that this farm is ✓ listed as a historic site on the Prior Lake web site . It contains ancient Indian burial grounds . Its scenic location at the edge of Prior Lake adds great esthetic beauty to the community . I have no doubt that the monetary return for developing this prime land is very high. I ask you to consider, however, the livelihood the Vierling Family and the values of the Prior Lake residents who signed a petition on the their behalf. For these reasons , I ask that you give careful reconsideration to the pending development plans of the City of Prior Lake concerning this property . Thank you for your attention to these concerns . Sincerely , ?,,I, w,� Paul David Wellstone United States Senator PDW : tam o wz Nl w , I '_ l 41A Ir. Doi re = ❑ HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING 2550 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, WEST POST OFFICE BOX 281 ,!' I 417 LITCHFIELD AVENUE, SW WASHINGTON , DC 20510-2303 COURT INTERNATIONAL BUILDING 105 2D AVENUE, SOUTH WILLMAR, MN 56201 ( 202) 224-5641 ST. PAUL, MN 55114-1025 VIRGINIA, MN 55792 (320) 231 -0001 ( 6511645-0323 ( 218) 741 - 1074 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Page 1 of 2 Jane Kansier From : Frank Boyles Sent : Wednesday, March 14 , 2001 5 : 21 PM To : Jane Kansier Subject : FW : Proposed Prior Lake zoning changes for your files --- Original Message----- From : Mike Gundlach, Council Member [ ma iIto : mgundlach@cityofpriorlake . com ] Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 9 : 39 PM To : Frank Boyles Subject : Fw : Proposed Prior Lake zoning changes fyi . . . ----- Original Message From : Greg & Tia Mack To : jzieska cityofpriorlake . com ; mqundlach@cityofpriorlake . com ; ipetersen@cityofpriorlake . com ; jericson cityofpriorlake . com ; wmader aacityofpriorlake . com Sent : Tuesday , March 13 , 2001 8 : 29 PM Subject : Proposed Prior Lake zoning changes To : Wesley Mader Jim Ericson Jim Peterson Mike Gundlach Joseph Zieska From: Greg & Tia Mack 14472 Bluebird Trail NE Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE : City proposal for the Vierling Farm Property zoning change Dear City Council members, I am writing to inform you of my concerns with the City of Prior Lake's proposal to change the zoning of the Vierling Farm property from an agricultural zone to a residential housing zone. I have two fundamental challenges with this proposal . 1 - The City' s decision to eliminate the opportunity for the Vierling's to continue their family business of farming . The farming institution is what this country, state and city were built from. If there are individuals out there that are willing to continue in a business that founded this land in spite of the continued restrictions from government that make it increasingly challenging to make a profit and a comfortable living, I say let them. The City of Prior Lake wouldn't consider doing this to a small business owner, why should the Vierling' s business be any different? 2 - This would not be consistent with what I understood to be the City of Prior Lake's vision to keep Prior Lake " small town" The City has refused quite a few big retailers to establish businesses in the City if Prior Lake (and for this I applaud you) . The lower levels of traffic have been instrumental in keeping this City a safe and inviting place to live . We purchased our home in Prior Lake, a significantly higher property tax zone, for this specific reason. I am happy to pay the additional property tax dollars to make up for the lack of "big business tax" income for the city - simply for the level of safety it provides . I feel that the addition of the hundreds of houses (that would likely result from the rezoning of this land) would result in a major increase in traffic on both County Road 18 and County Road 42 (in an already high traffic area with Casino travelers) as people would need to travel to Shakopee, Savage or Burnsville to buy groceries, clothing and household items . The increase in traffic and the additional high priced homes, would certainly make this area an appealing target for crime . We live in between the big city and the casino and I would strongly encourage that the City of Prior Lake not put in the development in the high traffic area of 18 & 42 to advertise that there are prime opportunities to make crime pay. 3 / 15 /01 PRIG °� FILE COPY �I1NNES0 March 15 , 2001 Stephen Kelly Kelly & Fawcett , PA 2350 Piper Jaffrey Plaza 444 Cedar Street St . Paul , MN 55101 RE : Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a City Council Agenda and Staff Report for the March 19 , 2000 City Council meeting . The meeting begins at 7 : 30 p . m . and is held at the Fire Station located at 16776 Fish Point Road ( east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21 ) . If you cannot attend the meeting or have any questions , please contact me at 447 -4230 . Sincerely , Jane Kansier Planning Coordinator Enclosure cc : Helen , Edward , Michael & Rebecca Vierling I :\00fi I es\00com pam\00-084\meet) rcc. doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372 - 1714 / Ph . (952 ) 447-4230 / Fax (952 ) 447 -4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER :4111VNESO ION f En(JRD AN11 7 ;M: FRANK BOYLES ZE t P March 16 , 2001 TO : MAYOR MADER , SUESAN PACE AND DON RYE SUBJECT : Vierling Agricultural Preserve Request A great deal of misinformation exists with respect to this petition . The City has received a report with a considerable number of factual inaccuracies , oral arguments intended to garner sympathy and even a letter from an elected official which fails to address relevant facts or criteria . I know that the City Council wishes to correct such inaccuracies so that the record can be clear . Accordingly , you have asked me for the attached information . In the final analysis , however , the City Council will be making its decision based upon criteria contained in the staff report and attachments . 1 . How long have the Vierlings owned the nronPrtT? County records show that the land was conveyed to Michael Vierling on November 29, 1860. 2 . What other Ag Preserve land is in Prior Lake , Shakopee or Savage ? County records show none in Savage, two properties in Shakopee held by one owners (Harold Schneider — 70 acres) . In Prior Lake, there are five Ag Preserve parcels — three owned by Helen Vierling totaling 317 acres, and two owned by Shun Sakuma totaling 39 acres. Statutory Requirements : At the Council meeting , the staff will be prepared to answer the following : 1 . What criteria does the State Planning Law provide for making land use designations ? 2 . What are the statutory criteria for designating property agricultural preserve ? 3 . Regardless of the action taken by the City Council , what prevents the owner from continuing to farm the property? 4 . How much total acreage do the Vierlings own in Prior Lake ? 5 . What entities , if any , are exempt from eminent domain ? Statement mane by the Vierling Attorney : I have reviewed the January 16th and February 12th presentations made by Patrick Kelly . The attached sheets identify the statements made by Mr . Kelly which are inaccurate . The sheets identify where the quotes can be found on the videotapes which we will bring along to the meeting . If Councilmembers want a specific quote played at the meeting , please let me know beforehand so we can be prepared at the meeting . If the Council would like additional information , please let me know . 16200 Eagle Creek Ave . S . E . , Prior Lake , Minnesota 55372- 1714 / Ph . (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Excerpts from the January 16 , 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Videotape Statements by Pat Kelly with respect to the Vierling Comp . Plan Amendment Request .................._.........-........- --._._._......_.. - .......__._..._._......................—_..........._......_.__.—.........._...—...._....._.._—_.......__..._.._......._._—.........................__............. —....—.....__.................._.__.... _ -; No . Statement Cued at This is zoned R- HD which converts to 30 units per j 2111 i acre . [ The guiding is R-HD] 3 2 . I This property is not part of the MUSA [He repeats € { twice and maintains that is what the staff said. The ! 2140 i property is in the MUSA . ] .....................;_--_-_..........._...._................._-_._.................._.................................._.......__................_.............._......-__.__..__.._._............ _......._....____........-_...............__.-_......._......... _..._.__...........___.....-_..___......._..........._.._........____..__.__.._.` 3 . When you review our documents (referring to the f 1/15/01 letter) you will see we have analyzed the sewer, the water, the streets , water problems . f 2152 f [the letter they submitted is fraught with inaccuracies. ] j 1...._.._.....- - --.... ........._.....-...._........ --.................. ........ _ - --........ 4 . If the Vierlings come in to develop the property there is i t an impact upon infrastructure . CSAH 42 is in a 2190-95 breakdown stage . t 1 [ CSAH 42 in Prior Lake is not at breakdown status. Utilities and transportation are in place . ] ; 1 I .......__...5 j If you put them out of business at this time , they will f.._.__..._.._._......._............._—.._......... 2241 __....................._............---......_._..._... t have no option but to going into development . j i ! [ The City is not stopping anyone from farming. ] I { E ( i k ---.........._......._._... ....__.......__........._...........___...........__ , __.... .._......... . __. . ....__.................. 6 . ` By your action to change the Comp . Plan 2272 j [ The family requested that the status of the property be changed] ; 4�. _........__z...._ .. _.......-. . . _._ . __. . __._.....___. -.__._-........._-_...._._.. ._._...._.-..............___-.....__..........._...._...__..._ _..._......__.....______.............---..........._......_........._.._..........__.......-.._._........._____� 7 . Bylacing them in the Comp . use plan , you have E This statement appears knocked them out of the farming operation and you 've twice at 2299 and at 2345 . knocked them out of Ag Preserve . i [See #6] 1i 8 . Your own planner says you do not have plans for this 2313 area in the 2020 Plan . [ Comp . Plan says the property is multi-family and Business Office Park] � 3 i _ i 1 Ironically , developers are saying they want to put 9 4 5000 -6000 dwelling units on it and manufacturing and 2369 industry . 3 x [ The actual density of the property could not exceed 30 I units per net acre . Only light industrial, warehouse and i office is allowed in Business Park. ] I I i._...._......- --...__....'_...._.......__...._...._........................_-_...... j -- -... .....i - - ---..._.....-... ..... _ ............_.__.._.. -......... . ... ._ _ ._ _..... . .... . . _ _ ...----. ._. . _ ._ ... _....._.. . . _ .. . . .. .. ._ ... _ _. .. - -; _- ... -- . .. .... - . .... ._.... - --. __..._.... . . . - -- . . .__� 10 . The central question ( about qualification for Ag Preserve ) is whether the zoning matches . It has to be 2859 rural density . E [ The central question is does the Comp . Plan designation match -.._.....__...........�_....__ 9 _ ... .. _ ._........_.. ...._............._....._........_._...__.._......._....-- - - -- ...__... - —.._...... ....._. Excerpts from the February 12 , 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Videotape Statements with respect to the Vierling Comp . Plan Amendment Request [Start tape counter at 358] _......._—..... ..,.. �.......__..... _ .....�..._._...._— .__..__.. _—_._._.._.._..........._............_............._................._.__.....__........._................._......... ...._....__......__........__.._.........._...... No . Statement , Cued at ( �_._..._._.. _ . __.......__._..._._......, �._........ -_..... - ............ _ .................... —_......._...... - .._........_.......... ...... ...........__........... -- .......__...__............__.......__.._._._....__... - ._... .........-.... ..._..........._.�_.i f 1 . [ Commissioner Stamson reopens the public hearing. ] 2105 _._....._......_ ............ .._.._....._..._.........._........._._.._.....__.._.__._.._.__..__.............. ....._........................__....._..._._...... ...._..__......... -... ........._........-_...._.... - - �2 . Allow us to go into Ag Preserve . Allow us to farm . 2168 j [None of the action contemplated affects the ability to farm] t £ 3 . .._..� Allow them to do the farming operation . 2207 E [ See #2] ( 4 . I Allow the farming operation without local intrusion . 2235 i [ See #2] H � m i i do AW a1O i a I o 1 0 1 oLh I o i o � d1 i i lYl N • � 1 N 1 N I N • dl I N • N I N 1 N eq r4 I I U Nlno 1 NN I NO I tV V1m I tug 1 NO 1 NON ��ss I f d o tD m 1 01st 1 4 tb 1 a 1-I LA I 4 N I i O H I o to 4 11 W I W ' pini W C7 y I C7 I Ca I ra I T9 \ f O 1 C9 rl0 1 1 1 I I pG 1 ri ry I ',+G1' 1 I I I I t W WCAN t 1 N \ 1 1 r-t I I 1 0 1 1 df 1 H I I ry Ln I I Ln \ 1 In N rl 1 In \ I In O r I I b1 rl dl 1 rl d1 1 H 1 H rt t H \ I H H 1 H O 1 I H \ I rl \ i 1"l i H W I ri r"i I /"i W 1 H Vol a21 1 I a I M I I ra I I 1 1 cq 1 1 x t 1 x l 1 0 1 1 W 03 1 W co l w 1 a I w . a 1 a to W411 1 >k� CO 1 •� 0 1 e / g 0 I �- W 1 w 1 0\ I I O ot1 1 0H l on l 0 � 1 O - 1 or \ I CA 10r I I G N 4# H W I in P4 1 m I t0 rl I to 0 1 a H I ri NC 1 1 ort 0 1 Hm O t 0K I a m lam - VI 1 Ho M I OH La cl I I Hr, H O N I ON I ON 1 0m 1 om r40 10N til I O N M 11 H O q1 m 1 Q 1 m 1 4 %44 1 0 i m i 0 1 m i W 1 01 t ri I N sB 4 1 f ppc V NH mr i NH N I NE I mEl C4 1 mH cq ;F4 1 NH 0' 1 3NH rn \\ I I fJ N Ot U to In I to U a1 I In U rl I o1 G In W r i\d1 101 U MI m G 'm I 01 G r HrL 1 1 H /d LO Cd r >n l W 1 {n i�7 3 I 1 In W P4 l r W ri 1 r L> I N r 1 1 Pi aim meq I Nr11 z I ciV2 to I &qCO x I Nadi WO 1 IN W I am 0M 4> 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 $ I rl 1 r l I ri t rl f M 1 rL I r-I I I rd O 1 0 I O I O I O I b 1 0 1 1 � , � o fa 18 f0 Ia Io l0 1 1 N 1N IN IN 1N IN IN 11 1 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I ! I w a Ib/ 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I CD m 1 4 I CO I IA Ito I O I O I I d1 1 V1 I q1 1 V1 I elf 1 %4 1 df I I m Ln I LA 1 to I Ln I I!1 I In I Ln I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I 9 a 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 I i I I 1 L I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I w Ih r Ir Ir Ir Ir Ir Ir II � 'SL- O t0 L O 10 10 to I o 1 1 Lin I u) I LM l in i � I I y{ d1 Ln I Ln I to I kn i Ln I N I Ln I I tm O I O 1 0 1 0 1 0 I O 1 0 1 1 I•v{ 0) Ln I Ln I Ln 1 Ln 11,Li 1 {(� ILA \D I I Qf I 1 i I I 1 1 1 O to I I d1 1 y+ 1 df 1 d1 I 11 I b I I t0 I tD Ito I t0 1 I r1f jH HH IH IH IH i t I� rl N N IN ICV IN IN I 1 1 1 _ r a tr1 I trf i M I I'•1 I rl I I I i 01 d7 O I O 1 0 I cp d7 I i t 1 1 I i i p ra H 01 101 I q 1 01 101 101 101 1 f � y O 10 10 10 10 10 10 II ,/• m CQ Ln 10 1 ul I Ln I to I In I Ln 1 1 v m I 1 1 I I I I 41 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I CA 10 IO 10 10 10 10 11 41! .Q H IN IN IN IN IN IN II Ir Ir it Ir 1r Ir 11 N o l0 l0 l0 Io 1p 10 II I i 1 I 1 I 1 1 d1 G O IO 10 / 4 IO 10 10 I i \ 0 10 10 10 10 10 14 11 fe E-{ O 1 4 1 CO I OI 0 I O I O I I 0 10 IO IO 10 IH Irl II 1 t 1 i 1 I 1 1 .IJ r1 I r i t I r 1r I l0 Itb 1 1 m O Ia / 0 la 10 10 10 II PH a I O t 0 I O 1 0 I N I N 11 Q N 1 N I Ld I N I N I N I N I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I t I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I 4 # i1,k A I 1 :S 1 L N I I t # I P 1 w i u I L I L 1 1 I i I I a N 1 N 1 N f I Q 1 1 1 1 17r 1 a7r I M am1 rt 1 a4 m i e1 I a I m 01 1 P4 D1 1 1 # HLn I iN I Cog Ln 1 WI r I r I r 1 1 M is Ln I O Ln 1 cry Ln I AG m I m 1 4 ? m 1 g x m 1 I .K f71 I Z W I I$ W 1 In I FC Ln I H A Ln I Pq Ln m It HI H 1 HAG 1 atll i Fa LA I �. HIn I QHM i t Qj • I a 14� 1 a RE I L 1 (tJ "1.+ I M 'r? ! L 1 dem 7 � i 5i rvxW i 5a '" 1 53 1 $4 1 a 1 1 W It H d 1 H I H I A4' QPa I id Ora 1 01 1 H * Icf; aN 1 404 1 4aN 1 r� xM 1 «C1'1� M 1 � W I QW I I H I 1 Ln 01 1 14 a I Q P 004 1 Q � a 1 1 rx I '� oIoGx,' 1 00 I o I a O I a p 1 1 a LO dl # Rdd H 0 1 1�1 H Op; I W rq Q I cq 1 00 1 00 1 L fir- ro Maa cW m "ag40 1 I.aPIH i rM 1 r 1 a9 I aN f r di Rcy p4I Ln I In I m I m f 1 A 4 z xAa x1� a xHa a MHm mrlm mm MMO * 1 1 v m # H IH IN IH IH IH IH It V rQa -1w Iw fa la 1a . a LP4 I I O N * I I 1 I I i 1 1 cfdN Q 41M I1m ILn IN Irl Irl I I PI\ # m Ica 1m 1rt Irl I0 Iro I I E4ult6 * Ir 1 r 1M 101 IN ItD I I r"ipX, LPI 1 PN I Im • Im f0 II I U m rd it0 0 o a o 0 0 go Ht # o 0 0 0 • o a o _ _ LT^ TTcrvvT TTkTIIA'1 TTAONO CCTRARVZTA YVA liC : OT nHL TO / 5T / 90 Memorandum To : Doug Hartmann , PW Supervisor From : Jane Kansier , Planning Coordinator Date : 6/7/01 Re : Planning Signs Please remove the following signs : • Comprehensive Plan Amendment, on the north side of CSAH 42 , and on the east side of Pike Lake Trail . Let me know if there are any other signs you see posted . Most of these can probably be removed . Thanks for your help . Please let me know if you have any questions . L :\OOFILES\00.COMPAM\00-0841remove sign . DOC 1 • L :\TEMPLATETILEINFO . D O C Minnesota Pollution Control Agency v� Designation of Feedlots as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation In 1998 the Legislature directed the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to issue National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits to those feedlots with over 1000 animal units (AU) , otherwise known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO) . Those feedlots that have between 300 AU and 1000 AU, and either discharges directly into waters of the state or through a man-made conveyance are also considered a CAFO ; therefore requiring a NPDES permit. Under certain circumstances it may also be necessary and appropriate to require a feedlot with less than 300 AU to be obtain a NPDES permit. First the feedlot must be designated a CAFO , which is done on a case-by- case basis following set procedures and criteria outlined in Code of Federal Regulations , Chapter 40 , Section 122 . 23 (c) . Since Minnesota has delegation to administer the NPDES program, the Commissioner of the MPCA has the ability to designate a feedlot a CAFO if it meets all the criteria. The MPCA is in the process of developing CAFO designation procedures , using the designation criteria 40 CFR 122 . 23 (c) . The following are the factors that shall be considered . A . 1 . The size of the feedlot operation and the amount of wastes reaching waters of the state . 2 . The location of the feedlot operation relative to waters of the state . 3 . The means of conveyance of animal wastes and/or process waste waters into waters if the state . 4 . The slope, vegetation, rainfall, and other factors affecting the likelihood or frequency of discharge of animal wastes and/or process waste waters into the waters of the state . 5 . Other relevant factors . [e . g . , value of the receiving water and its sensitivity to the pollutant load coming from the feedlot, long term consequences of this pollutant load on these waters] B . A feedlot with less than 300 animal units may be designated a CAFO if. a. pollutants are discharged into waters of the state through any manmade ditch, flushing system, or other similar manmade device or conveyance ; or 5/ 17/99 b . pollutants are discharged directly into waters of the state which originate outside of the facility and pass over, across , or through the facility or otherwise come into direct contact with animals confined in the operation. C . An on-site inspection shall be conducted prior to the feedlot being designated a CAFO . CAFO ' s will be regulated under the NPDES permit program. Once an inspection is performed, any staff recommendation to designate the feedlot as a CAFO shall be forwarded to the Commissioner or appropriate delegated staff with justification for this designation. When it has been determined that a feedlot may meet the designation criteria outlined above, staff should refer to the guidance document, "Process for Designating a Feedlot as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation, " on how to proceed with the designation process . 5/ 17/99 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Process for Designating a Feedlot as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation The following steps outline the process of how a feedlot will be designated a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) on a case-by-case basis . 1 . Identifying Feedlot as Potential CAFO The first step is for Feedlot staff to identify feedlots under 300 animal units as potential candidates for CAFO designation. . The process of identifying CAFO candidates will vary and are too numerous to document. Staff will need to be familiar with the designation criteria in the event they come across a feedlot that may be a candidate for designation. The staff familiar with the feedlot will review CAFO designation criteria and determine it the feedlot meets designation criteria. If the staff believes the feedlot could be designated a CAFO , the staff will present the case to feedlot staff at a weekly Feedlot Permit Forum . 2 . Permit Forum During one of the Feedlot Permit Forums, feedlot staff will present the details of the feedlot . As a group , the Forum will determine whether the feedlot in question warrants further investigation, including an inspection and the application of the federal criteria to the inspection ' s findings . If the information presented indicates that the process should continue, a site inspection will be performed. 1) A letter will be sent to the feedlot owner informing them of the inspection and it ' s purpose . 3 . Inspection of Feedlot Prior to the inspection a letter will be sent to the owner stating the reason for the inspection is to determine if the feedlot meets the CAFO designation criteria. A copy of the designation criteria shall be included, as well as any information that will help explain the implications of the potential designation and the NPDES permit process in general . Experienced feedlot staff will be the pool of inspectors . Minimum of two inspectors will conduct inspection. The inspection should be documented on the MPCA Feedlot Inspection Report or other appropriate forms to ensure complete documentation. 4. Permit Forum After the inspection, the Feedlot Permit Forum will then apply the findings of the inspection, as well as any other applicable information, to the designation criteria to determine whether a formal designation of the facility as a CAFO is necessary. If the Forum agrees that the feedlot should be designated as a CAFO, the process will continue 5/ 17/99 on to Step 5 . If the Forum determines that the feedlot does not meet the designation criteria, a letter will be sent to the owner stating that the feedlot does not meet designation criteria, however the owner must submit a permit application, if he has not already done so , for a permit to correct pollution problems that may exist. 5 . Produce Findings of Fact If the Feedlot Permit Forum decides that the feedlot should be designated as a CAFO , staff will prepare a Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Order (Order) for issuance by the Commissioner or the appropriate designated staff. The Findings portion of the Order will include , but not limited to , the information outlined in Attachment 1 . During this process staff will send a letter to the feedlot owner explaining the MPCA ' s intent to designated their feedlot as a CAFO . The letter should include . • an outline of how the owner has the opportunity to send the MPCA any information or evidence that may be relevant to this determination; • a copy of the inspection report ; • the number of days the owner has to respond or submit comments to be included in the Findings . Any information that is sent in will be included in the Order ' s Findings . 6 . Issue Final Order Designating the Feedlot a CAFO Route the Order and letter up through the Administrative Chain for signature by the Commissioner or appropriate designated staff. Ensure EPA Region 5 is copied on the letter. Include in the letter : • a copy of Findings of Fact. • that the owner must submit an application for a NPDES permit within 30 days of receipt of the letter. After such designation is made on a feedlot, public information documents shall be prepared to notify the public that the feedlot is considered a significant discharger to waters of the State and is being regulated under the federal clean water act and state water quality rules . 5/ 17/99 Attachment 1 Findings of Fact The Finding of Fact will include , but not limited to , the following items : a history of the site ; how the site was considered to be designated copy of letter(s) sent to owner process of how owner can submit relevant information time frame of when information must be submitted information sent in by the feedlot owner copy of the inspection report decisions made conclusions order 5/ 17/99 PUBLIC B-1 FARING 6Ud i u tst � Joe Conducted by the Planning Commission �J VC�iZI Q�1CQ i � JU IA Uae o I D 1 s CL 11tie K641 cx t The Planning Commission selcomes your comments in this matter . In fairness to all who choose to speak, we ask that, after speaking once , you allow everyone else. to speak before you address the Commission again and limit vour comments to clairincation or new information . Please be aware this is the principal opportunity to provide input on this matter . Once the public hearing is closed, further tesitmony or comment will not be possible except under rare conditions . The City Council will not hear additional testimony when it considers this matter. Thank you . ATTENDANCE . - PLEASE PRLNT NAINIE ADDRESS �L � cuC� � • CJ � Vi } 6 � 12 L560 /Ivry 1 r j7 ! ff lJvi+ cRr / ' `7 k j� VI tr e, hnni A� 6o 1U l��it � � ,�.� `/� �y l� i ��I, �� �� ✓v � !�2 � on- crh r� �:� ,� s s -3 � �— L S i k,JQA L 6 rf jVj k) I t s .L 5 /A;4 t2lZriz q2 ) 1 S Ma EA ) aLI y G I I - UnIST.DOC PAGE I r to z y� NUMBER OF UNITS 'N -•-»��� � �-»NNNNNNNNN ,n �N W ANOf V OOIOO�N W AChOf V 00 t00-�N W ANOf V 00 00000000000000000000000000000 x w p O0 � •i1• .lwV W � N 1 r F• O co 4:? N co •c p rt +' O O yQ',��. �+ :::::::::ii :. •i: iii::::::::::::}:: :.':..... ........ l J O > 7Q 0 Pao � p �. A y Q4 rF �—. w fD ec Al °' O A � A O >::: fD a ppp Pao a � K r 00 0 M W vQ O O f0 1•� O A � f+ cO : : :-� : : . O F+ \. (OO Pr r" . .�`.• .•l°:?:.. N 1••� �yy P F : :.!�. N M• a O 4ti H• O :. . . . . . . . . . . . �.� � J. .�4:�-ti-.�\::-ti� •� O �y Vacant Lots and Units Subdivision ( Single Family) Year Vacant Lots Total Lots Status Cardinal Ridge 1 st Addn 1994 2 64 97 % Cardinal Ridge 2nd Addn 1994 0 47 100 % Cardinal Ridge 3rd Addn 1995 0 39 100 % Cardinal Ridge 4th Addn 1996 3 35 91 % Cardinal Ridge 5th Addn 1997 9 38 76 % Carriage Hills 1 st Addn 1992 0 64 100 % Carriage Hills 2nd Addn 1993 0 55 100 % Carriage Hills 3rd Addn 1994 0 52 100 % Carriage Hills 4th Addn 1995 0 41 100 % Deerfield 2000 53 53 0 % Knob Hill 1995 1 49 98 % Knob Hill 2nd Addn 1997 3 52 94 % Knob Hill 3rd Addn 1998 0 27 100 % Knob Hill 4th Addn 1999 6 32 81 % Knob Hill 5th Addn 2000 29 40 28 % Maple Hills 2nd Addn 1998 5 28 82 % North Shore Oaks 7th Addn . 1997 4 13 69 % Northwood Oaks Estates 1 st Addn 1999 6 18 67 % Northwood Oaks Estates 2nd Addn 2000 33 33 0 % Preserve at The Wilds 1995 9 9 0 % Raspberry Ridge 2nd Addition 1994 1 27 96 % Raspberry Ridge 3rd Addition 1998 6 25 76 % Red Oaks 2nd Addn 1998 1 3 67 % The Wilds 1993 36 68 47 % The Wilds 2nd Addn 1996 7 24 71 % The Wilds 3rd Addn 1997 35 38 8 % The Wilds 4th Addn 1998 4 8 50 % Westbury Ponds 1993 0 36 100 % Westbury Ponds 1 st Addn 1995 1 36 97 % Westbury Ponds 2nd Addn 1995 0 7 100 % Westbury Ponds 3rd Addn 1996 1 17 94 % Wilderness Ponds 1995 0 49 100 % Wilderness Ponds 2nd Add 1997 8 45 82 % Windsong 2nd Addn 1995 3 7 57 % Windsong 4th Addn 1999 4 5 20 % Windstar 1997 0 21 100 % Woodridge Estates 2nd Addn 1995 0 59 100 % Woodridge Estates 3rd Addn 1995 2 33 94 % Woodridge Estates 4th Addn 1998 0 2 100 % Total Single Family Lots 272 1299 79 % Vacant Lot Inventory 9/7/00 Vacant Lots and U n its Subdivision (Townhomes) Year Vacant Units Total Units Status Deerfield 2nd Addn 2000 60 60 0 % Deerfield 3rd Addn 2000 64 64 0 % Glynwater 1st Addn 1998 19 80 76 % Glynwater 2nd Addn _ 2000 14 41 66 % Glynwater 3rd Addn 2000 14 22 36 % The Harbor 8th Addn 2000 2 3 33 % Pheasant Meadows 1996 0 24 100 % Pheasant Meadows 2nd Addn 1998 0 18 100 % Sterling North at The Wilds 1994 4 18 78 % Sterling South at The Wilds 1994 79 88 10 % Villas at The Wilds 1 st Addn 1994 3 9 67 % Wild Oaks 2000 19 21 10 % Woodview Estates 1984 13 20 35 % Total Multi -family Lots 291 513 430%16 Vacant Lot Inventory 9/7/00 Minnesota Statutes 2000 273 . 111 Page 1 of 5 Minnesota Statutes 2000 , Table of Chapters Table of contents for Chapter 273 273 . 111 Agricultural property tax . Subdivision 1 . Citation . This section may be cited as the " Minnesota Agricultural Property Tax Law . " Subd . 2 . Public policy . The present general system of ad valorem property taxation in the state of Minnesota does not provide an equitable basis for the taxation of certain agricultural real property and has resulted in inadequate taxes on some lands and excessive taxes on others . Therefore , it is hereby declared to be the public policy of this state that the public interest would best be served by equalizing tax burdens upon agricultural property within this state through appropriate taxing measures . Subd . 3 . Requirements . ( a ) Real estate consisting of ten acres or more or a nursery or greenhouse , and qualifying for classification as class 1b , 2a , or 2b under section 273 . 13 , subdivision 23 , paragraph ( d ) , shall be entitled to valuation and tax deferment under this section only if it is primarily devoted to agricultural use , and meets the qualifications in subdivision 6 , and either : ( 1 ) is the homestead of the owner , or of a surviving spouse , child , or sibling of the owner or is real estate which is farmed with the real estate which contains the homestead property ; or ( 2 ) has been in possession of the applicant , the applicant ' s spouse , parent , or sibling , or any combination thereof , for a period of at least seven years prior to application for benefits under the provisions of this section , or is real estate which is farmed with the real estate which qualifies under this clause and is within four townships or cities or combination thereof from the qualifying real estate ; or ( 3 ) is the homestead of a shareholder in a family farm corporation as defined in section 500 . 24 , notwithstanding the fact that legal title to the real estate may be held in the name of the family farm corporation ; or ( 4 ) is in the possession of a nursery or greenhouse or an entity owned by a proprietor , partnership , or corporation which also owns the nursery or greenhouse operations on the parcel or parcels . ( b ) Valuation of real estate under this section is limited to parcels the ownership of which is in noncorporate entities except for : ( 1 ) family farm corporations organized pursuant to section 500 . 24 ; and ( 2 ) corporations that derive 80 percent or more of their gross receipts from the wholesale or retail sale of horticultural or nursery stock . http ://www.revisor. leg . state , mn.us/stats/273 / 1 1 l . html 1 /24/01 Minnesota Statutes 2000, 273 . 111 Page 2 of 5 Corporate entities who previously qualified for tax deferment pursuant to this section and who continue to otherwise qualify under subdivisions 3 and 6 for a period of at least three years following the effective date of Laws 1983 , chapter 222 , section 8 , will not be required to make payment of the previously deferred taxes , notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision 9 . Special assessments are payable at the end of the three - year period or at time of sale , whichever comes first . ( c ) Land that previously qualified for tax deferment under this section and no longer qualifies because it is not primarily used for agricultural purposes but would otherwise qualify under subdivisions 3 and 6 for a period of at least three years will not be required to make payment of the previously deferred taxes , notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision 9 . Sale of the land prior to the expiration of the three - year period requires payment of deferred taxes as follows : sale in the year the land no longer qualifies requires payment of the current year ' s deferred taxes plus payment of deferred taxes for the two prior years ; sale during the second year the land no longer qualifies requires payment of the current year ' s deferred taxes plus payment of the deferred taxes for the prior year ; and sale during the third year the land no longer qualifies requires payment of the current year ' s deferred taxes . Deferred taxes shall be paid even if the land qualifies pursuant to subdivision lla . When such property is sold or no longer qualifies under this paragraph , or at the end of the three - year period , whichever comes first , all deferred special assessments plus interest are payable in equal installments spread over the time remaining until the last maturity date of the bonds issued to finance the improvement for which the assessments were levied . If the bonds have matured , the deferred special assessments plus interest are payable within 90 days . The provisions of section 429 . 061 , subdivision 2 , apply to the collection of these installments . Penalties are not imposed on any such special assessments if timely paid . Subd . 4 . Determination of value . The value of any real estate described in subdivision 3 shall upon timely application by the owner , in the manner provided in subdivision 8 , be determined solely with reference to its appropriate agricultural classification and value notwithstanding sections 272 . 03 , subdivision 8 , and 273 . 11 . In determining the value for ad valorem tax purposes , the assessor shall use sales data obtained from agricultural lands located outside the seven metropolitan counties but within the region used for computing the range of values under section 273 . 11 , subdivision 10 . The sales shall have similar soil types , number of degree days , and other similar agricultural characteristics as contained in section 273 . 11 , subdivision 10 . Furthermore , the assessor shall not consider any added values resulting from nonagricultural factors . Subd . 5 . Separate determination of market value and tax . The assessor shall , however , make a separate determination of the market value of such real estate . The tax based upon the appropriate local tax rate applicable to such property in the taxing district shall be recorded on the property assessment records . Subd . 6 . Agricultural use . Real property qualifying under subdivision 3 shall be considered to be in agricultural use provided that annually : http ://www .revisor. leg. state . nm ,us/stats/273 / 11 Lhtml 1 /24/01 Minnesota Statutes 2000, 273 . 111 Page 3 of 5 ( 1 ) at least 33 - 1 / 3 percent of the total family income of the owner is derived therefrom , or the total production income including rental from the property is $ 300 plus $ 10 per tillable acre ; and ( 2 ) it is devoted to the production for sale of agricultural products as defined in section 273 . 13 , subdivision 23 , paragraph ( e ) . Slough , wasteland , and woodland contiguous to or surrounded by land that is entitled to valuation and tax deferment under this section is considered to be in agricultural use if under the same ownership and management . Subd . 7 . Repealed , 1969 c 1039 s 10 Subd . 8 . Application . Application for deferment of taxes and assessment under this section shall be filed by May 1 of the year prior to the year in which the taxes are payable . Any application filed hereunder and granted shall continue in effect for subsequent years until the property no longer qualifies . Such application shall be filed with the assessor of the taxing district in which the real property is located on such form as may be prescribed by the commissioner of revenue . The assessor may require proof by affidavit or otherwise that the property qualifies under subdivisions 3 and 6 . Subd . 8a . Repealed , 1984 c 593 s 46 Subd . 9 . Additional taxes . When real property which is being , or has been valued and assessed under this section no longer qualifies under subdivisions 3 and 6 , the portion no longer qualifying shall be subject to additional taxes , in the amount equal to the difference between the taxes determined in accordance with subdivision 4 , and the amount determined under subdivision 5 , provided , however , that the amount determined under subdivision 5 shall not be greater than it would have been had the actual bona fide sale price of the real property at an arms length transaction been used in lieu of the market value determined under subdivision 5 . Such additional taxes shall be extended against the property on the tax list for the current year , provided , however , that no interest or penalties shall be levied on such additional taxes if timely paid , and provided further , that such additional taxes shall only be levied with respect to the last three years that the said property has been valued and assessed under this section . Subd . 10 . Lien . The tax imposed by this section shall be a lien upon the property assessed to the same extent and for the same duration as other taxes imposed upon property within this state . The tax shall be annually extended by the county auditor and if and when payable shall be collected and distributed in the manner provided by law for the collection and distribution of other property taxes . Subd . 11 . Special local assessments . The payment of special local assessments levied after June 1 , 1967 , for A mprovements made to any real property described in subdivision 3 together with the interest thereon shall , on timely application as provided in subdivision 8 , be deferred as long as such property meets the conditions contained in subdivisions 3 and 6 or is transferred to an agricultural preserve under sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 . If special assessments against the http : //www .revisor. leg. state ,mn. us/stats/273/ 111 . html 1 /24/01 Minnesota Statutes 2000 , 273 . 111 Page 4 of 5 property have been deferred pursuant to this subdivision , the governmental unit shall file with the county recorder in the county in which the property is located a certificate containing the legal description of the affected property and of the amount deferred . When such property no longer qualifies under subdivisions 3 and 6 , all deferred special assessments plus interest shall be payable in equal installments spread over the time remaining until the last maturity date of the bonds issued to finance the improvement for which the assessments were levied . If the bonds have matured , the deferred special assessments plus interest shall be payable within 90 days . The provisions of section 429 . 061 , subdivision 2 , apply to the collection of these installments . Penalty shall not be levied on any such special assessments if timely paid . Subd . lla . Continuation of tax treatment upon sale . When real property qualifying under subdivisions 3 and 6 is sold , no additional taxes or deferred special assessments plus interest shall be extended against the property provided the property continues to qualify pursuant to subdivisions 3 and 6 , and provided the new owner files an application for continued deferment within 30 days after the sale . For purposes of meeting the income requirements of subdivision 6 , the property purchased shall be considered in conjunction with other qualifying property owned by the purchaser . Subd . 12 . Statutory construction . This section shall be broadly construed to achieve its purpose . The invalidity of any provision shall be deemed not to affect the validity of other provisions . Subd . 13 . General applicability . This section shall apply to assessments for tax purposes made in 1968 and thereafter . Subd . 14 . Applicability of special assessment provisions . This section shall apply to special local assessments levied after July 1 , 1967 , and payable in the years thereafter , but shall not apply to any special assessments levied at any time by a county or district court under the provisions of chapter 116A . Subd . 15 . Dissected parcels ; continued deferment . Real estate consisting of more than ten , but less than 15 , acres which has : ( 1 ) been owned by the applicant or the applicant ' s parents for at least 70 years ; ( 2 ) been dissected by two or more major parkways or interstate highways ; and ( 3 ) qualified for the agricultural valuation and tax deferment under this section through assessment year 1996 , taxes payable in 1997 , shall continue to qualify for treatment under this section until the applicant ' s death or transfer or sale by the applicant of the applicant ' s interest in the real estate . When the property ceases to qualify for treatment under this section , the recapture provisions of subdivision 9 will apply with respect to the last ten years that the property has been valued and http ://www.revisor. leg , state ,mn .us/stats/273/ 111 .html 1 /24/01 Minnesota Statutes 2000 , 273 . 111 Page 5 of 5 assessed under this section . HIST : Ex1967 c 60 s 1 - 13 ; 1969 c 1039 s 1 - 9 ; 1973 c 322 s 25 ; 1973 c 450 s 1 ; 1973 c 582 s 3 ; 1976 c 2 s 94 , 95 , 1976 c 134 s 78 ; 1977 c 307 s 29 ; 1977 c 423 art 3 s 4 ; 1980 c 437 s 2 ; 1980 c 497 s 1 ; 1980 c 560 s 4 ; 1982 c 523 art 22 s 1 - 3 ; 1983 c 222 s 8 ; 1984 c 593 s 16 , 17 ; 1Sp1985 c 14 art 20 s 2 ; 1986 c 444 , 1988 c 719 art 5 s 84 , 1989 c 277 art 2 s 19 ; 1Spl989 c 1 art 2 s 11 ; art 3 s 7 ; 1991 c 291 art 12 s 8 ; 1994 c 416 art 1 s 14 ; 1994 c 587 art 5 s 6 ; 1996 c 471 art 3 s 6 ; 1997 c 231 art 2 s 12 , 13 ; 1999 c 243 art 5 s 8 ; 2000 c 490 art 5 s 6 Copyright 2000 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes , State of Minnesota . http ://www.revisor. leg . state ,mn. us/stats/273 / 1 1 l .html 1 /24/01 Minnesota Statutes 2000, 473H . 08 Page 1 of 1 Minnesota Statutes 2000 , Table of Chapters Table of contents for Chapter 473H 473H . 08 Duration . Subdivision 1 . Till expiration started . Agricultural preserves shall continue until either the landowner or the authority initiates expiration as provided in this section . Subd . 2 . Expiration by landowner . A landowner may initiate expiration by notifying the authority on a form provided by the commissioner of agriculture . The notice shall describe the property for which expiration is desired and shall state the date of expiration which shall be at least eight years from the date of notice . The notice and expiration may be rescinded by the owner at any time during the first two years following notice . Subd . 3 . Expiration by authority . The authority may initiate expiration by notifying the landowner by registered letter on a form provided by the commissioner of agriculture , provided that before notification ( i ) the comprehensive plan and the zoning for the land have been officially amended so that the land is no longer planned for long term agriculture and is no longer zoned for long term agriculture , evidenced by a maximum residential density permitting more than one unit per quarter / quarter , and ( ii ) the authority has certified such changes pursuant to section 473H . 04 , subdivision 2 . The notice shall describe the property for which expiration is desired and shall state the date of expiration which shall be at least eight years from the date of notice . Subd . 4 . Notice to others . Upon receipt of the notice provided in subdivision 2 , or upon notice served by the authority as provided in subdivision 3 , the authority shall forward the original notice to the county recorder for recording , or to the registrar of titles if the land is registered , and shall notify the county auditor , county assessor , the metropolitan council , and the county soil and water conservation district of the date of expiration . Designation as an agricultural preserve and all benefits and limitations accruing through sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 for the preserve shall cease on the date of expiration . The restrictive covenant contained in the application shall terminate on the date of expiration . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 8 ; 1982 c 523 art 32 s 10 ; 1999 c 11 art 1 s 12 Copyright 2000 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes , State of Minnesota . http ://www.revisor. leg . state . nm ,us/stats/473H/08 .html 1 /24/01 Minnesota Statutes 2000, 462 . 355 Page 1 of 2 Minnesota. Statutes 2000 , Table of Chapters Table of contents for Chapter 462 462 . 355 Preparation , adoption , and amendment of comprehensive municipal plan . Subdivision 1 . Preparation and review . The planning agency shall prepare the comprehensive municipal plan . In discharging this duty the planning agency shall consult with and coordinate the planning activities of other departments and agencies of the municipality to insure conformity with and to assist in the development of the comprehensive municipal plan . In its planning activities the planning agency shall take due „ cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government and other affected public agencies . The planning agency shall periodically review the plan and recommend amendments whenever necessary . Subd . la . Plan update by metropolitan municipalities . Each municipality in the metropolitan area , as defined in section 473 . 121 , subdivision 2 , shall review and update its comprehensive plan and fiscal devices and official controls as provided in section 473 . 864 , subdivision 2 . Subd . 2 . Procedure for plan adoption and amendment . The planning agency may , unless otherwise provided by charter or ordinance consistent with the municipal charter , recommend to the governing body the adoption and amendment from time to time of a comprehensive municipal plan . The plan may be prepared and adopted in sections , each of which relates to a major subject of the plan or to a major geographical section of the municipality . The governing body may propose the comprehensive municipal plan and amendments to it by resolution submitted to the planning agency . Before adopting the comprehensive municipal plan or any section or amendment of the plan , the planning agency shall hold at least one public hearing thereon . A notice of the time , place and purpose of the hearing shall be published once in the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten days before the day of the hearing . Subd . 3 . Adoption by governing body . A proposed comprehensive plan or an amendment to it may not be acted upon by the governing body until it has received the recommendation of the planning agency or until 60 days have elapsed from the date an amendment proposed by the governing body has been submitted to the planning agency for its recommendation . Unless otherwise provided by charter , the governing body may by resolution by a two - thirds vote of all of its members adopt and amend the comprehensive plan or portion thereof as the official municipal plan upon such notice and hearing as may be prescribed by ordinance . Subd . 4 . Interim ordinance . If a municipality is conducting studies or has authorized a . study to be conducted or has held or has scheduled a hearing for the purpose of considering adoption or amendment of a comprehensive plan or official controls as defined in section 462 . 352 , subdivision 15 , or if new territory for which plans or controls have not been adopted is annexed to a municipality , the governing body of the municipality may adopt an interim ordinance applicable to all or http : //www .revisor . leg . state , mn , us/stats/462/355 .html 3 / 19/01 Minnesota Statutes 2000 , 462 . 355 Page 2 of 2 part of its jurisdiction for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health , safety and welfare of its citizens . The interim ordinance may regulate , restrict or prohibit any use , development , or subdivision within the jurisdiction or a portion thereof for a period not to exceed one year from the date it is effective , and may be extended for such additional periods as the municipality may deem appropriate , not exceeding a total additional period of 18 months . No interim ordinance may halt , delay , or impede a subdivision which has been given preliminary approval prior to the effective date of the interim ordinance . HIST : 1965 c 670 s 5 ; 1976 c 127 s 21 ; 1977 c 347 s 68 ; 1980 c 566 s 24 ; 1983 c 216 art 1 s 67 ; 1985 c 62 s 1 , 2 ; 1995 c 176 s 4 Copyright 2000 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes , State of Minnesota . http * //www .revisor. leg . state . mn . us/stats/462/355 .html 3 / 19/01 Minnesota Statutes 2000 , 462 . 352 Page 1 of 3 Minnesota Statutes 2000 , Table of Chapters Table of contents for Chapter 462 462 . 352 Definitions . Subdivision 1 . Application . For the purposes of sections 462 . 351 to 462 . 364 the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them . Subd . 2 . Municipality . " Municipality " means any city , including a city operating under a home rule charter , and any town . Subd . 3 . Planning agency . " Planning agency " means the planning commission or the planning department of a municipality . Subd . 4 . Repealed , 1980 c 566 s 35 Subd . 5 . Comprehensive municipal plan . " Comprehensive municipal plan " means a compilation of policy statements , goals , standards , and maps for guiding the physical , social and economic development , both private and public , of the municipality and its environs , including air space and subsurface areas necessary for mined underground space development pursuant to sections 469 . 135 to 469 . 141 , and may include , but is not limited to , the following : statements of policies , goals , standards , a land use plan , including proposed densities for development , a community facilities plan , a transportation plan , and recommendations for plan execution . A comprehensive plan represents the planning agency ' s recommendations for the future development of the community . Subd . 6 . Land use plan . " Land use plan " means a compilation of policy statements , goals , standards , and maps , and action programs for guiding the future development of private and public property . The term includes a plan designating types of uses for the entire municipality as well as a specialized plan showing specific areas or specific types of land uses , such as residential , commercial , industrial , public or semipublic uses or any combination of such uses . A land use plan may also include the proposed densities for development . Subd . 7 . Transportation plan . " Transportation plan " means a compilation of policy statements , goals , standards , maps and action programs for guiding the future development of the various modes of transportation of the municipality and its environs , including air space and subsurface areas necessary for mined underground space development pursuant to sections 469 . 135 to 469 . 141 , such as streets and highways , mass transit , railroads , air transportation , trucking and water transportation , and includes a major thoroughfare plan . Subd . 8 . Community facilities plan . " Community facilities plan " means a compilation of policy statements , goals , standards , maps and action programs for guiding the future development of the public or semipublic facilities of the municipality such as recreational , educational and cultural facilities . http : //www . revisor . leg . state . nm . us/stats/462/352 . html 3 / 19/01 VIERLING PROPERTY TAX ANALYSIS ******* In this analysis , the limited market value is removed for comparison RESIDENTIAL ( HOMESTEAD) Residential Residential PID Acreage Market Value Property Tax 25-923 -001 -0 60 $ 11200 , 000 $ 27 , 464 25-923 -015-0 92 $ 118402000 $ 36 , 420 25-924-003 -0 160 $ 31200 , 000 $ 63 , 360 $ 127 , 244 AGRICULTURAL (HOMESTEAD) Agricultural Agricultural PID Acreage Market Value Property Tax 25-923-001 -0 60 $ 159 , 000 $ 11986 25-923-015-0 92 $ 194 , 900 $ 11722 25-924-003 -0 160 $ 375 , 800 $ 31303 $ 7 , 011 AGRICULTURAL ( HOMESTEAD) (GREEN ACRES) Agricultural Agricultural PID Acreage Market Value Property Tax 25-923-001 -0 60 $ 145 , 300 $ 11785 25-923-015-0 92 $ 118 , 600 $ 11045 25-924-003-0 160 $ 245 , 700 $ 21160 $ 4 , 990 AGRICULTURAL ( HOMESTEAD) (GREEN ACRES) (AG PRESERVE) Agricultural Agricultural PID Acreage Market Value Property Tax 25-923-001 -0 60 $ 145 , 300 $ 17695 25-923-015-0 92 $ 118 , 600 $ 907 25-924-003-0 160 $ 245 , 700 $ 11920 $ 4 , 522 Page 1 of 12 Minnesota Statutes 2000, Chapter 473H . Copyright 2000 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. == 473H . 01 473H . 01 Citation ; policy ; purpose . Subdivision 1 . Citation , Sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 may be cited as the " Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Act . " Subd . 2 . Policy ; purpose . It is the policy of the state to encourage the use and improvement of its agricultural lands for the production of food and other agricultural products . It is the purpose of sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 to provide an orderly means by which lands in the metropolitan area designated for long term agricultural use through the local and regional planning processes will be taxed in an equitable manner reflecting the long term singular use of the property , protected from unreasonably restrictive local and state regulation of normal farm practices , protected from indiscriminate and disruptive taking of farmlands through eminent domain actions , protected from the imposition of unnecessary special assessments , and given such additional protection and benefits as are needed to maintain viable productive farm operations in the metropolitan area . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 1 == 473H . 02 473H . 02 Definitions . Subdivision 1 . Terms . For purposes of sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 the terms defined in this section shall have the meanings given them . Subd . 2 . Agricultural preserve or preserve . " Agricultural preserve " or " preserve " means a land area created and restricted according to section 473H . 05 to remain in agricultural use . Subd . 3 . Agricultural use . " Agricultural use " means the production for sale of livestock , dairy animals , dairy products , poultry or poultry products , fur - bearing animals , horticultural or nursery stock , fruit , vegetables , forage , grains , or bees and apiary products . Wetlands , pasture and woodlands accompanying land in agricultural use shall be deemed to be in agricultural use . Subd . 4 . Authority . " Authority " means the unit of government exercising planning and zoning authority for the land specified in an application as provided under section 473H . 05 and pursuant to sections 394 . 21 to 394 . 37 , 462 . 351 to 462 . 364 , or 366 . 10 to 366 . 19 . Where both a county and a township have adopted zoning regulations , the authority shall be the unit of government designated to prepare a comprehensive plan pursuant to section 473 . 861 , subdivision 2 . Subd . 5 . Certified long - term agricultural land . " Certified long - term agricultural land " means land certified pursuant to section 473H . 04 as eligible for designation as agricultural preserves . http *//www .revisor. leg. state.mn. us/cgi-bin/getstatchap .pl 1 /24/01 Page 2 of 12 Subd . 6 . Covenant . " Covenant " means a restrictive covenant initiated by the owner and contained in the application provided for in section 473H . 05 whereby the owner places the limitations on specified land and receives the protections and benefits contained in sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 . Subd . 7 . Long- term agricultural land . " Long - term agricultural land " means land in the metropolitan area designated for agricultural use in local or county comprehensive plans adopted and reviewed pursuant to sections 473 . 175 , and 473 . 851 to 473 . 871 , and which has been zoned specifically for agricultural use permitting a maximum residential density of not more than one unit per quarter / quarter . Subd . 8 . Metropolitan area . " Metropolitan area " has the meaning given it in section 473 . 121 , subdivision 2 . Subd . 9 . Owner . " Owner " means a resident of the United States owning land specified in an application pursuant to section 473H . 05 , and includes an individual , legal guardian or family farm corporation as defined in section 500 . 24 , having a joint or common interest in the land . Where land is subject to a contract for deed , owner means the vendor in agreement with the vendee . Subd . 10 . Quarter / quarter . " Quarter / quarter " means one quarter of one quarter of any section in the rectangular land survey system . Subd . 11 . Repealed , 1999 c 11 art 1 s 72 HIST : 1980 c 566 s 2 ; 1982 c 523 art 32 s 1 , 2 ; 1999 c 11 art 1 s 8 == 473H . 03 473H . 03 Required size of parcel , exceptions . Subdivision 1 . 40 acres or more . Long- term agricultural land comprising 40 or more acres shall be eligible for designation as an agricultural preserve . Subd . 2 . If noncontiguous . Noncontiguous parcels may be included to achieve the minimum acreage requirement in subdivision 1 , provided that each parcel is at least ten acres in size and provided that all separate parcels are farmed together as a unit . Subd . 3 . 35 acre exception . The minimum acreage requirement in subdivision 1 may be reduced to 35 acres provided the land is a single quarter / quarter parcel and the amount less than 40 acres is due to a public road right - of - way or a perturbation in the rectangular survey system resulting in a quarter / quarter of less than 40 acres . Subd . 4 . 20 acre exception . Contiguous long- term agricultural land comprising not less than 20 acres and surrounded by eligible land on not less than two sides shall be eligible for designation as an agricultural preserve provided the authority by resolution determines that : ( i ) the land area predominantly comprises Class I , II , III , or irrigated Class IV land according to the Land Capability Classification Systems of the Soil Conservation Service and the county soil survey ; ( ii ) the land area is considered by the authority to be an essential part of the agricultural region ; and ( iii ) the parcel was a http@//www.revisor . leg . state . mn . us/cgi-bin/getstatchap . pl 1 /24/01 Page 3 of 12 parcel of record prior to January 1 , 1980 , or the land was an agricultural preserve prior to becoming a separate parcel of at least 20 acres . Subd . 5 . Two or more authorities . Contiguous long - term agricultural land meeting the total acreage requirements of this section but located in two or more authorities so that the minimum acreage requirement is not met in one or more of the authorities shall be eligible by joint resolution of the affected authorities . Subd . 6 . owner ' s adjoining preserve parcel . Contiguous long - term agricultural land not meeting the total acreage requirements of this section but under the same ownership as an agricultural preserve adjoining it on at least one side shall be eligible for designation as an agricultural preserve . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 3 ; 1989 c 313 s 9 == 473H . 04 473H . 04 Authority must certify eligible preserve lands . Subdivision 1 . With maps , published notice . Each authority in the metropolitan area having land classified agricultural pursuant to section 273 . 13 shall certify by resolution using appropriate maps which lands , if any , are eligible for designation as agricultural preserves . Maps shall be in sufficient detail to identify eligible lands by property boundaries . At least two weeks before the resolution is to be adopted , the authority shall publish notice of its intended action in a newspaper having a general circulation within the area of jurisdiction of the authority . No additional lands shall qualify for designation as agricultural preserves until the authority certifies qualification . Subd . 2 . When eligibility ends . Land shall cease to be eligible for designation as an agricultural preserve when the comprehensive plan and zoning for the land have been amended so that the land is no longer planned for long term agricultural use and is no longer zoned for long term agricultural use , evidenced by a maximum residential density permitting more than one unit per 40 acres . When changes have been made , the authority shall certify by resolution and appropriate maps which lands are no longer eligible . At least two weeks before the resolution is to be adopted , the authority shall publish a notice of its intended action in a newspaper having a general circulation within the area of jurisdiction of the authority . Subd . 3 . Maps to met council . The authority shall provide the metropolitan council with suitable maps showing any lands certified eligible pursuant to subdivision 1 or decertified pursuant to subdivision 2 . The metropolitan council shall maintain maps of the metropolitan area showing all certified long term agricultural lands . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 4 ; 1982 c 523 art 32 s 3 , 4 == 473H . 05 473H . 05 Application , covenant agreement . Subdivision 1 . Before March 1 for next year ' s taxes . An owner or owners of certified long term agricultural land may apply to the authority with jurisdiction over the land on forms httpo//www.revisor. leg. state.nm,us/cgi-bin/getstatchap .pl 1 /24/01 Page 4of12 provided by the commissioner of agriculture for the creation of an agricultural preserve at any time . Land for which application is received prior to March 1 of any year shall be assessed pursuant to section 473H . 10 for taxes payable in the following year . Land for which application is received on or after March 1 of any year shall be assessed pursuant to section 473H . 10 in the following year . The application shall be executed and acknowledged in the manner required by law to execute and acknowledge a deed and shall contain at least the following information and such other information as the commissioner deems necessary : ( a ) Legal description of the area proposed to be designated and parcel identification numbers if so designated by the county auditor and the certificate of title number if the land is registered ; ( b ) Name and address of owner ; ( c ) An affidavit by the authority evidencing that the land is certified long term agricultural land at the date of application ; ( d ) A statement by the owner covenanting that the land shall be kept in agricultural use , and shall be used in accordance with the provisions of sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 which exist on the date of application and providing that the restrictive covenant shall be binding on the owner or the owner ` s successor or assignee , and shall run with the land . Subd . 2 . May be fee . The authority may require an application fee , not to exceed $ 50 , to defray administrative costs . Subd . 3 . Repealed , 1999 c 11 art 1 s 72 Subd . 4 . Reenrolling . If an owner ' s property was initially granted agricultural preserve status under subdivision 1 but the owner filed an agricultural preserve termination notice on that property , the owner may reenroll the property in the program as provided in this subdivision . In lieu of the requirements in subdivision 1 , the county may allow a property owner to reenroll by completing a one page form or affidavit , as prepared by the county . The county may require whatever information is deemed necessary , except that approval by the city or township , in which the property is located , shall be required on the form or affidavit . The county may charge the property owner a reenrollment fee , not to exceed $ 10 , to defray any administrative cost . Reenrolling property under this subdivision shall be allowed only if the same property owner or owners wish to reenroll the same property under the same conditions as was originally approved under subdivision 1 . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 5 ; 1982 c 523 art 32 s 5 , 6 ; 1986 c 444 ; 1994 c 587 art 5 s 24 ; 1999 c 11 art 1 s 9 == 473H . 06 473H . 06 Notification . Subdivision 1 . Application . Upon receipt of an application , the authority shall determine if all material http : //www .revisor. leg . state .mn. us/cgi-bin/getstatchap .pl 1 /24/01 Page 5 of 12 required in section 473H . 05 has been submitted and , if so , shall determine that the application is complete . When used in this chapter , the term " date of application " means the date the application is determined complete by the authority . Within five days of the date of application , the authority shall forward the completed and signed application to the county recorder , and copies to the county auditor , the county assessor , the metropolitan council , and the county soil and water conservation district . Subd . 2 . Recording ; memorialization . The county recorder shall record the application containing the restrictive covenant and return it to the applicant . If the land is registered , the registrar of titles shall memorialize the application containing the restrictive covenant upon the certificate of title . The authority shall be notified by the recorder or registrar of titles that the application has been recorded or memorialized . Subd . 3 . Taxes . The county auditor , for taxes payable in the following year and thereafter for the duration of the preserve , shall determine local tax rates , assessments and taxes involving the preserve according to the provisions of section 473H . 10 . Subd . 4 . Validation , assessment . The county assessor , for taxes payable in the following calendar year and thereafter for the duration of the preserve , shall value and assess the agricultural preserve according to section 473H . 10 . Subd . 5 . Maps ; reports . The metropolitan council shall maintain agricultural preserve maps , illustrating ( a ) certified long term agricultural lands ; and ( b ) lands covenanted as agricultural preserves . The council shall make yearly reports to the department of agriculture and such other agencies as the council deems appropriate . Subd . 6 . Monitoring . County auditors shall maintain records of the taxes assessed and paid on agricultural preserves in a manner prescribed by the commissioner of revenue for the orderly monitoring of the program . Subd . 7 . Conservation problem statements . The county soil and water conservation district may prepare an advisory statement of existing and potential conservation problems for the agricultural preserve land . The statement shall be forwarded to the owner of record and a copy of the statement shall be forwarded to the authority . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 6 ; 1981 c 356 s 242 , 248 ; 1982 c 523 art 32 s 7 - 9 ; 1983 c 289 s 115 subd 1 ; 1987 c 312 art 1 s 26 subd 2 ; 1988 c 719 art 5 s 84 ; 1Sp1989 c 1 art 2 s 11 ; 1993 c 163 art 1 s 33 ; 1999 c 11 art 1 s 10 , 11 == 473H . 07 473H . 07 Commencement of preserve . A land area shall be deemed an agricultural preserve and subject to all the benefits and restrictions of sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 commencing 30 days from the date of application . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 7 == 473H . 08 httpo//www .revisor. leg. state . nm ,us/cgi-bin/getstatchap .pl 1 /24/01 Page 6 of 12 473H . 08 Duration . Subdivision 1 . Till expiration started . Agricultural preserves shall continue until either the landowner or the authority initiates expiration as provided in this section . Subd . 2 . Expiration by landowner . A landowner may initiate expiration by notifying the authority on a form provided by the commissioner of agriculture . The notice shall describe the property for which expiration is desired and shall state the date of expiration which shall be at least eight years from the date of notice . The notice and expiration may be rescinded by the owner at any time during the first two years following notice . Subd . 3 . Expiration by authority . The authority may initiate expiration by notifying the landowner by registered letter on a form provided by the commissioner of agriculture , provided that before notification ( i ) the comprehensive plan and the zoning for the land have been officially amended so that the land is no longer planned for long term agriculture and is no longer zoned for long term agriculture , evidenced by a maximum residential density permitting more than one unit per quarter / quarter , and ( ii ) the authority has certified such changes pursuant to section 473H . 04 , subdivision 2 . The notice shall describe the property for which expiration is desired and shall state the date of expiration which shall be at least eight years from the date of notice . Subd . 4 . Notice to others . Upon receipt of the notice provided in subdivision 2 , or upon notice served by the authority as provided in subdivision 3 , the authority shall forward the original notice to the county recorder for recording , or to the registrar of titles if the land is registered , and shall notify the county auditor , county assessor , the metropolitan council , and the county soil and water conservation district of the date of expiration . Designation as an agricultural preserve and all benefits and limitations accruing through sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 for the preserve shall cease on the date of expiration . The restrictive covenant contained in the application shall terminate on the date of expiration . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 8 ; 1982 c 523 art 32 s 10 ; 1999 c 11 art 1 s 12 == 473H . 09 473H . 09 Early termination . Termination of an agricultural preserve earlier than a date derived through application of section 473H . 08 may be permitted only in the event of a public emergency upon petition from the owner or authority to the governor . The determination of a public emergency shall be by the governor through executive order pursuant to sections 4 . 035 and 12 . 01 to 12 . 46 . The executive order shall identify the preserve , the reasons requiring the action and the date of termination . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 9 == 473H . 10 473H . 10 Ad valorem property taxes . Subdivision 1 . Valuation , assessment . Real property http : //www .revisor. leg . state.mn.us/cgi-bin/getstatchap .pl 1 /24/01 Page 7of12 within an agricultural preserve shall be valued and assessed pursuant to chapter 273 , except as provided in this section . Subd . 2 . No nonagricultural factors . All land classified agricultural and in agricultural use , exclusive of buildings , shall be valued solely with reference to its appropriate agricultural classification and value , notwithstanding sections 272 . 03 , subdivision 8 , and 273 . 11 . In determining the value for ad valorem tax purposes the assessor shall not consider any added values resulting from nonagricultural factors . Subd . 3 . Computation of tax ; state reimbursement . ( a ) After having determined the market value of all land valued according to subdivision 2 , the assessor shall compute the net tax capacity of those properties by applying the appropriate class rates . When computing the rate of tax pursuant to section 275 . 08 , the county auditor shall include the net tax capacity of land as provided in this clause . ( b ) The county auditor shall compute the tax on lands valued according to subdivision 2 and nonresidential buildings by multiplying the net tax capacity times the total local tax rate for all purposes as provided in clause ( a ) . ( c ) The county auditor shall then compute the tax on lands valued according to subdivision 2 and nonresidential buildings by multiplying the net tax capacity times the total local tax rate for all purposes as provided in clause ( a ) , subtracting $ 1 . 50 per acre of land in the preserve . ( d ) The county auditor shall then compute the maximum ad valorem property tax on lands valued according to subdivision 2 and nonresidential buildings by multiplying the net tax capacity times 105 percent of the previous year ' s statewide average local tax rate levied on property located within townships for all purposes . ( e ) The tax due and payable by the owner of preserve land valued according to subdivision 2 and nonresidential buildings will be the amount determined in clause ( c ) or ( d ) , whichever is less . The state shall reimburse the taxing jurisdictions for the amount of the difference between the net tax determined under this clause and the gross tax in clause ( b ) . Residential buildings shall continue to be valued and classified . according to the provisions of sections 273 . 11 and 273 . 13 , as they would be in the absence of this section , and the tax on those buildings shall not be subject to the limitation contained in this clause . The county may transfer money from the county conservation account created in section 40A . 152 to the county revenue fund to reimburse the fund for the tax lost as a result of this subdivision or to pay taxing jurisdictions within the county for the tax lost . The county auditor shall certify to the commissioner of revenue on or before June 1 the total amount of tax lost to the county and taxing jurisdictions located within the county as a result of this subdivision and the extent that the tax lost exceeds funds available in the county conservation account . Payment shall be made by the state on December 26 to each of the affected taxing jurisdictions , other than school districts , in the same proportion that the ad valorem tax is distributed if the county conservation account is insufficient to make the reimbursement . There is annually appropriated from http ://www.revisor. leg. state .mn.us/cgi-bin/getstatchap .pl 1 /24/01 Page 9 of 12 begun , ( b ) the township due to size , tax base , population or other relevant factors would not be able to provide normal governmental functions and services ; or ( c ) the agricultural preserve would be completely surrounded by lands within a municipality . This section shall not apply to annexation agreements approved by the Minnesota municipal board prior to creation of the preserve . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 14 , 1982 c 523 art 32 s 11 == 473H . 15 473H . 15 Eminent domain actions . Subdivision 1 . Follow procedures here . Any agency of the state , any public benefit corporation , any local , county or regional unit of government , or any other entity possessing powers of eminent domain under chapter 117 , shall follow the procedures contained in this section before ( 1 ) acquiring any land or easement having a gross area over ten acres in size within agricultural preserves ; or ( 2 ) advancing a grant , loan , interest subsidy or other funds for the construction of dwellings , commercial or industrial facilities , or water or sewer facilities that could be used to serve nonfarm structures within agricultural preserves . Subd . 2 . Notice of intent to EQB . At least 60 days prior to an action described in subdivision 1 , notice of intent shall be filed with the environmental quality board containing information and in the manner and form required by the environmental quality board . The notice of intent shall contain a report justifying the proposed action , including an evaluation of alternatives which would not require acquisition within agricultural preserves . Subd . 3 . EQB review . The environmental quality board , in consultation with affected units of government , shall review the proposed action to determine the effect of the action on the preservation and enhancement of agriculture and agricultural resources within the preserves and the relationship to local and regional comprehensive plans . Subd . 4 . EQB order . If the environmental quality board finds that the proposed action might have an unreasonable effect on an agricultural preserve or preserves , the environmental quality board shall issue an order within the 60 - day period for the party to desist from such action for an additional 60 - day period . Subd . 5 . Hearing . During the additional 60 - day period , the environmental quality board shall hold a public hearing concerning the proposed action at a place within the affected preserve or otherwise easily accessible to the preserve upon notice in a newspaper having a general circulation within the area of the preserves , and individual notice , in writing , to the municipalities whose territory encompasses the preserves , the agency , corporation or government proposing to take the action , and any public agency having the power of review of or approval of the action , in a manner conducive to the wide dissemination of the findings to the public . Subd . 6 . Joint review . The review process required in this section may be conducted jointly with any other hftp6//www.revisor. leg . state . nm . us/cgi -bin/getstatchap . pl 1 /24/01 Page 10 of 12 environmental impact review conducted by the environmental quality board . Subd . 7 . AG may sue to enjoin . The environmental quality board may request the attorney general to bring an action to enjoin any agency , corporation or government from violating the provisions of this section . Subd . 8 . Does not apply to emergency . This section shall not apply to an emergency project which is immediately necessary for the protection of life and property . Subd . 9 . EQB suspension . The environmental quality board shall be empowered to suspend any eminent domain action for up to one year which it determines to be contrary to the purposes of sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 and for which it determines there are feasible and prudent alternatives which have less negative impact on the agricultural preserves . Subd . 10 . When agricultural preserve ends . The agricultural preserve designation and all benefits and limitations accruing through sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 for the preserve and the restrictive covenant for that portion of the preserve taken , shall cease on the date the final certificate is filed with the court administrator of district court in accordance with section 117 . 205 . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 15 ; 1982 c 523 art 32 s 12 ; 1Sp1986 c 3 art 1 s 82 == 473H . 16 473H . 16 Conservation . Subdivision 1 . Unsound conservation practices described . Land within an agricultural preserve shall be farmed and otherwise managed according to sound soil and water conservation management practices . Management practices which are not sound shall be any use of the land resulting in wind or water erosion in excess of the soil loss tolerance for each soil type as found in the United States soil conservation service , Minnesota technical guide . Subd . 2 . Enforcement . The authority shall be responsible for enforcing this section . Upon receipt of a written complaint stating the conditions or land management practices which are believed to be in violation of this section , the authority shall consult with the county soil and water conservation district . The district shall determine the average soil loss in tons per acre per year for each field cited in the complaint according to the universal soil loss equation and the wind erosion equation , and shall return to the authority a report showing the average soil loss in tons per acre per year for each field and a list of alternative practices that the landowner can use to reduce the soil loss to the limit allowed in subdivision 1 . After consultation , and if in the judgment of the authority the land is not being managed properly as required by this section , the authority shall adopt a resolution to this effect and shall seek corrective measures from the owner . At the request of the landowner , the district shall assist in the planning , design and application of the practices selected to reduce the soil loss to an acceptable level and shall give such landowners a high priority for providing technical and cost share assistance . http : //www.revisor. leg. state.mn.us/cgi-bin/getstatchap .pl 1 /24/01 Page 11 of 12 Subd . 3 . Civil penalty . Any owner who fails to implement corrective measures to the satisfaction of the authority within one year of notice from the authority shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $ 1 , 000 . The authority may recover the penalty by a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction . Subd . 4 . Costs . Costs incurred by the authority in the enforcement of this section may be charged to the property owner . Charges not timely paid may be placed on the tax rolls and collected as a special assessment against the property . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 16 ; 1982 c 523 art 32 s 13 == 473H . 17 473H . 17 Land use . Subdivision 1 . For agricultural production . Land within an agricultural preserve shall be maintained for agricultural production . The average maximum density of residential structures within an agricultural preserve shall not exceed one unit per 40 acres . The location of any new structure shall conform to locally applicable zoning regulations . Commercial and industrial uses shall not be permitted except as provided in subdivision 2 after the user is issued a permit by the authority . The authority shall be responsible for enforcing this section . Subd . la . Allowed commercial and industrial operations . ( a ) Commercial and industrial operations are not allowed on land within an agricultural preserve except : ( 1 ) small on - farm commercial or industrial operations normally associated with and important to farming in the agricultural preserve area , ( 2 ) storage use of existing farm buildings that does not disrupt the integrity of the agricultural preserve , and ( 3 ) small commercial use of existing farm buildings for trades not disruptive to the integrity of the agricultural preserve such as a carpentry shop , small scale mechanics shop , and similar activities that a farm operator might conduct . ( b ) " Existing " in paragraph ( a ) , clauses ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) , means existing on August 1 , 1987 . Subd . 2 . Density restriction after subdivision . When a separate parcel is created for a residential structure , commercial , or industrial use permitted under subdivision 1 , the parcel shall cease to be an agricultural preserve unless the eligibility requirements of section 473H . 03 are met . However , the separate parcel shall remain under the maximum residential density restrictions in effect for the original preserve at the time it was placed into the preserve until the agricultural preserve status for the original parcel ends . HIST : 1980 c 566 s 17 ; 1987 c 396 art 7 s 5 - 7 == 473H . 18 473H . 18 Transfer from Agricultural Property Tax Law treatment . When land which has been receiving the special agricultural http ://www.revisor. leg. state.nm.us/cgi-bin/getstatchap ,pl 1 /24/01 Page 12 of 12 valuation and tax deferment provided in section 273 . 111 becomes an agricultural preserve pursuant to sections 473H . 02 to 473H . 17 , the recapture of deferred tax and special assessments , as provided in section 273 . 111 , subdivisions 9 and 11 , shall not be made . Special assessments deferred under section 273 . 111 shall continue to be deferred for the duration of the preserve . For purposes of this section , " deferred special assessments " shall include the total amount of deferred special assessments under section 273 . 111 on the property , including any portion of the deferred special assessments which have not yet been levied at the time the property transfers to the agricultural preserves program under this chapter . All special assessments so deferred shall be payable within 90 days of the date of expiration unless other terms are mutually agreed upon by the authority and the owner . In the event of early termination of a preserve or a portion of it under section 473H . 09 , all special assessments accruing to the terminated portion plus interest shall be payable within 90 days of the date of termination unless otherwise deferred or abated by executive order of the governor . In the event of a taking under section 473H . 15 all special assessments accruing to the taken portion plus interest shall be payable within 90 days of the date the final certificate is filed with the court administrator of district court in accordance with section 117 . 205 . HIST : 1982 c 523 art 32 s 14 ; 1Spl986 c 3 art 1 s 82 ; 1994 c 587 art 5 s 25 == 473H . misc2000 Minn . Stats . repealed , etc . secs in chap 473H 473H . 13 Repealed , 1982 c 512 s 17 http ://www . revisor. leg. state.mn. us/egi-bin/getstatchap .pl 1 /24/01 Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan : Name : kra,L 1 ���r�I ri cL� i4 Address;Z/&%P 7;e x Prior Lake , MN Signature- �A v AS Name: Address : Z14 ��° � ' ' Prior Lake , MN lit Signature Name . , ;. r r , Address : y �✓ `� E /� � Prior Lake , MN Signature7� w «t�cr► � - - - : v X11 Yr Name . a Address : b1 �� � Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : � �/; € s� ,l� r= ' "' � Prior Lake , MN i . Signature Name : p Address :_ 'q 1r, Prior Lake , MN t . Name : y j ; � L. � � � r �t Prior Lake , MN Address : � Signature fce Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan : NdMea e Address : d ( G c° _ 0 � � � ►�, � �, , - Prior Lake , MN a Signature VLAck Ndme: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature -, , ,. Ndrne _ F Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature `s- . Ndim i Address : ` Prior Lake , MN Signature 0 Name: 4 Address : ( , A h)_ ;�� ti ;-� "> � r. t Prior Lake , MN i Signature . ' Ndrne : () LA Address : (a� 6 -TVA 113 �' f ,r ' Prior Lake , MN J ry Signature Ndrne: � , Iz Address : r / - Prior Lake , MN f, Signatur Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : f , efr M cr Address : ' `>� k ` vL�n Prior Lake , MN Signature Name j Address : �` � » Z, �� �L � z �: � � � � w � ; � -� Prior Lane , MN so ignatu re4d _ _. _ _ Name : X „ Address : /f LI( ' AM Prior Lake , MN Sign Name: Addre 2 � % `�' ` Prior tce , MN Signat Name : LAWN L bcw �5i OA�Vv5z ,,j Address : 45' ' wutlm � � ` � NwFz Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : 'w7Y ' kI'L Prior Lake , MN l Signature y j Name : l Address : /' < � 'r -- Prior Lake , MN i Zl��Signature - / I i I Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address : I+ cam, Prior Lake , MN Signature( &-�_'�f - _ ._ . ./. L Name: Va ' Address : n1 /h ; �� �; `�� � f 1 Prior Lake , MN Signature` �0 Nannie: . 1-� . , c 4-- r Address : 1 `7 4 fl f% ► � , ►' } Prior Lake , MN f Signature . 44 Name : cWei X, Address : r Y Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : ' Address : 1 k)� 6,/, �y - Prior Lake , MN i Signature t E Name : t � n Address : lq3lzl /'7) i Prior Lake , MN SignatureL � Na - - me : Address : l C � � / �v' /\` � Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes , I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : l it f' k ( Address : Lf 320 0 i n Prior Lake , MN Signatu &AA Foe Nd ime . Address : l �) D ev �� lei Prior Lake , MN rr , , Signature h . 1 , 44 6a:7 Name : LI- L�21kC Address : h� Prior Lake , MN (V Signature / i . Name: [ � % 5 Address : 13 , 5 Iib ° PO Aj Prior Lake , MN Signature 46C Name: -�'� GC"' .� C4/ GZIFF) Address : qy � I � �� w� Prior Lake , MN Signatul; r ) Ndme : 7 o' �� � � V1� CA � n Address : uIF, .�) �C c: � , �t1 Prior Lake , MN Signature Ndme. Address : IF * . Prior Lake , MN IF Signature co:o Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : { Name : f' _ Address : t `- 1 ' -< Prior Lake , MN Signature T" Name : �1 Address : rt i ` , Prior Lake , MN Si nature � ` ' I � Name : Address : �' ; , ►'} j! ) Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : le Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Address . -� , /,� %� Prior Lake , MN OOOFV Signature = ' i Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: . Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature do Name : Address :_ ,� Prior Lake, MN Signature Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature- Nan e * ignatureName: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : Prior Lane , MN Signature Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : N (ame : Address : A40 � Lt- 1^) & Prior Lake , MN Signaturec ®� f �J Name . . ° Address : e ? €" ° ' x ' "' ' ti Prior Lake , MN Signature , .. .. 1 . N d m Ion U I .' rl Address : j I ` , (At rF r . - Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : 12 � r7 Ili ,C . (�i ( Address : ±JPriicr Latce , MN Signatur . Name: Address : I I . � IroU 0 V\ Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: e - i��l-�l Address : Q Prior Lake , MN Signatur I —� Name: ' f2 X �(� Address : Prior Lake , MN ��' � `� l Signature Yes, 1 support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : " Address : t ' !� Prior Lake , MN zy j y UCy Signature Name: f to 711 ts-a . PA Address : 11,531 " rre � , r Prior Lake , MN Signature_ aC (t ? , F r° Name: 400c` ( e Address . /y6 V L Prior Lake , MN r Signatureoo* A, P m Name . �i+�lt�. :� �(r� c t Addressy - .Prior Late , MN Signature Name: �1 Address : w74:)5 rX �" ` Prior Late , MN so gnature � � � �n Name : UIC Address : L"rdy of c , Prior Late , MN Signature ' Name : u . Address : S� s C ep' y u r2 Prior Lake , MN Signature / Yes , I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : 'LO' 7 , C / o �z Address * . 9s " av ��� d ST A14G Prior Lake , MN Signature J l Address : LIQ c� I�C M/ L� Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : l �l` ► l � COvvI*�Ur Prior Lake , MN Signature n4- Ncirne ' Scby Address : L Prior Lake , MN Signature Narne:_ Address : L Z95 x W (i LqLf 7. Prior Lake , MN 0 4tt Signature 7 Name : Address : �? Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: �� Address : �7 �L Prior Lake , MN Signature �° Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : M MIO.. 0 +� � cc� w� e Address : q k ( () Okem SO VLLA4 b, es% NI Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: 1 Address : A F&c� 4 -=- Prior Lake , MN Signature IAt Name : / Address : G/ 3e?.zJ C x.4 &I—C— Prior Lake , MN Signature YJ Z Name : -� Address : -?D Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: JJ�' s� r Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature 2ZL" Name : le " Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: ` a �� salfe 0 % 'O tj Address : A7 Oz /M�0c fLc/ �'— Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name Icuin _ . Address: f � Prior Lake , MN ignatuml NML aL:: Name0\� c) C) Address : C2t ,� a r Via 00� I l � Prior Lake , NDN Signature Name. &n4jPK joz� o Address: , OfiltcQAJd AW// , IL4� Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address :, Oct c�n Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : u � Prior Lake, MN Signature�4y Name: WCt 6 (4r Address :, GO � ad r� Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : E . Prior Lake , NDN SignatureJl Yes, sv L Merlin Family in their request to change the pp 9 Y q 9 designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian , Name Address . , ] � `i� Prior Lake , MN Signat7ze , Name: / � �- AL Address :4 :� Prior Lake , MN Signatu Name: V" Hal)v4k Address* , � � w/ Prier Lake, MN Signature / x � Name: Address :qq 1 CCQS� 5� Prior Lake , MN Signature2 A Z"V� Name: address :T 4C4 I -ud -e Tv Prior Lake, MN Signature Name : �� o address : Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address , � � fir' �/�� �s a � (i 6e l� Prior Lake , MN Signatu Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan , Na ;meWzvdjA "yyWl Address: a � C i rClz S Prior Lake , MN Signature . Name: �i -.� 4� 1 � S V Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature - Name: r U L j 6P Ll tV Address: I - � Shote b Prior Lake, MN Signature _ Address : ` Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address : S v � � - Prior Lake, MN Signatu Nam Address : ) t)Iy SOOT Prior Lake, MN Signatu - Name: 1 I Address : `� I AI)Of( I� C Prior Lake , MN I Signature ji l g � Yes l su p6 e Vier in Fa in their request to change the • pp Y q 9 designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address: �l Z 7, le,'` � �i �Gd / Prior Lake , MN Signature Address, ' Prier Lake , MN `Signature 'Name: Q < , � Z2L VV)- Address: p Q'V) k ,l Prior Lake, MN T. Signature Q x. Name. Address : Prior Lame , MN xSignature ANaIme Address *T t S SI Prior Lake, MN Signature Name : took (� / Address : � `� � � Prior Lake, MN Signatur Name � (''1C� Address : ck Prior Lake , MN Signature - Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : rr � Y 1� Address: 632A - Cam ( ' ) K V\0 Prior Lake , MN Signature C Name, ah ).Qt 1fr Address : ( ` C\ C, : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: 1r � /�` 9x � Address: 3 y 7 ( ! Prior Lake , MN Signature --_ Nam ( tetLy Address : S S S� S \ Prior Lake , MN Signature Ndwm( a/ L)&A Address : CZO - Prior Lake, MN Signature Name : Q r 1 ,rn Address , 7 Y66 I b2 S f• est Prior Lake, MN Signatu Name: Address * 5C Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes l support the ' Ing � m!t ' n � r ppo a er g o y e equest to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : ti `� Address: I 7W62 L Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Z4 Address : Z7VX Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: � 6C Address: 176W d Prior Lake, MN Signature e Name: d Address z S Prior Lake , MN Signature Ncirrie: � cl Address : S (O OU 'RC [ OD Prior Lake, MN so gnatu % Name : G� epi 7 1 Address : � ) �� 0 �io� J0o �c Cr Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address : 1 6 0 6 s to r� �e Prior Lake , MN Signature f F I A A JL, k�) 617 Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : )(Nam e : ceso, Address: ` Il'� 1CYdoy 4 4 15 1 v' ) Prior Lane , MN )Qrgnature Name: Lih d ffL I Address : P q (L ww d U .(Prior Lake , MN XSignatu XName: -�' Vii^ Address: �"L'I� - nor Lake, MN X Signature Name: t o (z T� \ Cy� S � rA C Address : OC) 12alo C Prier Lake , MN °°C � Si nature4 g - Name. Dck cW Address : , 5�q l Amb ) 6j 1111a Prior Lake, MN Signature Name : ' 2w Ki �tk 6o CK Address : �3 Prior Lake, MN Signature Li U Name. Address : DuV�1, L - Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, 1 support the Vierling family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian : Name . /h Prior Lake , MNAddress: 4oz Signature ' - Name: � Address : i) S4 N &Gj Rakw Prior Lake , MN Signat f. Name: Address �' , y Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address : �f Prior Lake , NDN Signature Name: 2 �z w Address : G04R , 0 � Prior Lake, MN Signature Name : Address\ C' jAatOrMVjr Prior Lake, MN Signatur r2-4.;k Name : Address : �f «l � � nor Lake , MN Signature '" Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian : Name : E r.. I C Q ) LLD [I tj d Address. � C ?� � �c� � �I Prior Lake , MN Signature aaaLut i Nome : Address : 0 , ( Y1v Prior Lake , MN Signature c==�L /W'I't<___- Lel Name: y Zce�►� to - , Address: �O Sr�� � � I f Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: G Address : �S 9 Q U E Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: (yd" 'y"" A/ k8 Address * 6 VO 170j�({�� 1� �� Prior Lake, MN 1 Signature Name : hh 9(�' n L Address :. G ho d'/ Prior Lake, MN 1 R Signature L�2 Name: 4r, f Address : I L j 3 c 1�rSk � Prior Lake , MN Signature K ) ly],90 9 R k 6Ek) Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the design7�t n of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : � Address: �� � �� ; J` Prior Lake , MN Signatu Name: Address : 11 �1 �� Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address: " Prior Lake, MN Signature_, Name{ Address * 5cL) S-tAL. 2Lir (SS Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: L k� 4 (F ) L�7e L Address : / r �? V l /� Prior Lake, MN Signature Name . � '� cry /'vc Address:. s� T� z ��` Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, l support the Vierlin Family in their request to change the LAX 9 9 designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : We W) et we " Nam Address: y ?/ To tv e r S Prier Lake , MN Signature Name 5 c ; Address: 1 - c S Wo fie , MN -w ev Signature . Name : 4 Address : Q QQ � ROU , (fit Prior Lake, MN Signature 7 k Name : Address : -( G �)18 / % Prior Lake , NDN Signature Name: �� Address : 0 Urtake-,_° MN Signatre 71 Name : f j Address : ` c� �, {' . Prior Lake; N Signature Fs: Name . Address : � � '► lr �' .,� r� 6 Prior Lake , MN Signature fJ �� Yes I support the Merlin Famil in their request to change the pp 9 Y q 9 designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : - Address: LI) A5/& AA jr Avg- `� Prior Lake , MN Signature - F Name: �� J/ 1G" Address: (P ? ;v1 ' 5t Prior Lake , MN Signature Name Address: � c7 ' Prior Lake, MN < Signature, ' ee � � % a Name . - , ° Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature 's Name: Ali ( Ole /' C, r �.i. Address : Prior Lake, MN Signature Name : ., Address : oSZ �> r, r Prior Lake, MN G Signature Name : '1 C Address : � L) f � ff Prior Lake , MN Signature -' 2 f � Yes, I support ort the Vin j��mi in eVr� uest too a the chap 9 � 9 designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Pian : 9 P Name : Address*� � ciZ /.�rose- Prior Lake . MN Sb Ignaturou Name: 12�ly tr 7- <1 p'' G) a Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature M Name: ° Address: A lk�2 Prior Lake, MN Signature Name: t - Address . ,�. 12 � / 41 f Z, �r �1 AJ Prior Lake , MN Signature Ndme'. ` i` C v'l CrL/ Address : 1 / 60 Prior Lake, MN Signature r �` � c - .rte - Name : Address : iA6nor Lake, MN Signature Name. 1 � -- Address : 14 7a �� v\ ( Prior Lake , MN 0,\j Signature , _ ct� Yes 1 su art th cerin Jamil in eI?Wuestpp e g y to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address: J9 Prior Lake , MN 9 { 6 Signature , i 2 Name: i l.. iA l'; 72 Address:.. `36 � � c �� � � Prior Lake , MN a� oc(Signature L' 4 f Nam _, , �U' y �, Address : La _ O� , 1 (` Prior Lake, MN C Signature " :] k elie ° Name: Ktuly\ Se., L re ` Address :, w _ T ` Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : � � Prior Lake, MN Signaty �� 4 Name : a / - , S Address : c ' c = c° �t i �ftor Lake, MN Signature Name: c /8&4w� Address : 01-f C �- Prior Lake , MN Signature , 46 Yes, l support the Vierlin Tamil in their request to change the p 9 Y q 9 designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : IL Address: .A C/ � ell l Prior Lake , MN • E Signature Name . U . ) I b/i > 1 _ 'T Address : U t ° ` Prior Lake , NDN Signature ', Name : Address: °° ` ' ` �'' Pr4or Lake, NDN Signature .. s` E 11 r' _ _ 1 Name �ZP Address :, ' ° ` c , r ? c' Pnoor Lake , NDN Signaturet Z' � Address : j ' riar Lake, NDN Signature Name: Address : `� Prior Lake, MN 3 � Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature _� Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Address Prior Luke , MN Signature Name: i ' i^ \ `� Address : - f Prior Lake , MN Signature { s .M Name Address: Oma - °��� " Prior Lake, MN Signature ` ' ' Name: 0� i,` � < Address :- , A� ��`� � ���� Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address : � � NN Signature Name : IN\ Address: a Prior Lake, MN Signature Name. l !i Address : ,g -� y ` PHor Lake , MN Signature Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address : 4 _ °� (Z N Prior Lake , MN ? Srgnatur Namew i f� J a, ..a Address : t ' L =r d Prior Lake , MN Signature t Name: Address . Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : Address . Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address . Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Ndme. Address : Prior Lake , MN s Signature k Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plane, Name : A i N 2 ; �C � Address : qa � h �c� ti� . _Prior Lake , MN Signature ' Name: 2 A) f��S Address : `�' a 3 � d %.4- AJ E Prior Lake , MN Signature. yzde ILL /YI.SzV Name . r, _Ke .S Address : o :LA Prior Lake , MN Signature - KQ Name: Address : 'fa �a O - I �{ D � - � Prior Lake , MN Signature & : 2LU 16 u Name'. - 1G �n5 6V J Address . 4Aa 140 ' Prior Lake , MN Signature C s Name : .�4J 07,\1 Address : �- S� Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name 'S : I �C � � � Address : q 12 Z / � Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature / moi Name. Address : � � ��- �r� , rior Lake , NDN Signature Name : Address : AN S 4,%JiRIEP NC Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : 14 6 Z2 Prior Lake , MN Signature Ndme. 92L A Addres • �r Prior Lake, MN Name: 'Mhc1 `�� 1� Address : G�-�t � \ \ w \iz Y � V ` N Prior Lake , MN Signature l� � � Yes , 1 support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : ca Z// Address : 'I ? « Prior Lake , MN i _ Signature Ncime:_� f11� � � �N Address : x `/ / 69 IS, C/ � I /VC Prior Lake , MN Signature grAndt Name: �(Uol c ,�"� Address : 14 4 "Se%A>ord (�� Prior Lake , MN Signature b �Jrr� aLi Name: A OV7 Address : ///2 � _ X/F" T Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: 2 � � �/ � V, I \ r . Address : L //A Prior Lake , MN Signature - 6%'4 Name: Address : I > ( � CD ^ %J '" Prior Lake , MN Signature � n - - Name : i ,� � lJLc� a Address : / �i l�€'rior Lake , MN St gnatur Yes, 1 support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan : Name : 4 (n2 r U - Address . ZY /�Osc=- tvoc '� !J �/ Prior Lake , MN � Signatu /i Name: Address : i o ( oy � �n 2 � Prior Lake , MN Signature — CIA Name: _ � � L 2 � c Address : l �I �v� `l Rge,� /�c /\/ L Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: c t Address :' 4-� I 12clsewoea 12,d Prior Lake , MN SignatureI ) 0. , Name t / (4 G r -- Address :T l Lj (f l Z �9 ( � �r 6 %`k � 2 Cl Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : ` gLj'ep 6 //1& Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : 7 E6 - C I) o ®Cj Prior Lake , MN Signature Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : L� u� c Address : L. c C . � � c�t ti C rior Lake , MN Signature Z � � Name: ' Address : z1'�=' / '� � Prior Lake , MN Sig nature!/ � !�' -�2 - - Name : Address : y � y5/�. i ��; /��✓� - Prior Lane , MN Signatu -- - Name : d d" Address : U r Prior Lake , MN Signature 0 aifiA Name: ,�,. , �t Address : , 1 U � ib��� �� Prior Lake , MN Signature J ' �� � hiC Name : Address : i ` ` i Prior Lake , MN Signature TO C� trlll � K-UC� S Address : I LI P� � � I UEh7 rct 7 CCS 1 Prior Lake , MN Signature M,,/U a-lKaklL) Yes, I support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their Land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : Address : �I C� Z l �' i., // / �' ,- , ,Prior Lake , MN Name: Address : �- r � Pow e� �� Prior Lake , MN Signature`� � - Name : / y � C,f �f Tit Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Ndme : 1162 z�/' t%opyl -t�J Address : ` : toe-V21 l L- Prior Lake , MN Signature Nd me * /✓ _ G Address : ` �� �' Prior Lake , MN Signature Ncime : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name ..6 os-1 i n P l X15 Address : /qI Rq R( 'v:3Md NC Prior Lake , MN Signature - Oh. -bipU t9�J Yes, l support the Vierling Family in their request to change the designation of their land in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan : Name : � Address : 0 Prior Lake , MN Signature t Name: Li SU Address : ` L� o �c' oucl� ` Prior Lake , MN Signature C�" xa _ �, = A Name : Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name : wy Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature Name: Address : Prior Lake , MN Signature