Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7B - Windstar Addition STAFF AGENDA REPORT AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: 78 JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE 97-XX REZONING PROPERTY FROM THE A-1 (AGRICULTURAL) DISTRICT TO THE R-1 (SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT FOR "WINDST AR ADDITION" MARCH 17, 1997 DATE: INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this agenda item is to consider a zone change from the A-1 District to the R-1 District of a 14.14 acre site located along the east side of Mushtown Road, directly west of Woodridge Estates and east of O'Rourke Addition. On March 3, 1997, the Council approved a preliminary plat for this property to be known as "Windstar Addition". Rezoning was not accomplished at that meeting because such action requires four votes. The preliminary plat consists of 14.14 acres to be subdivided into 21 lots for single family dwellings. the site is presently zoned A-1. The applicant is requesting this zone change in order to develop the property. DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission held a public hearing to review this preliminary plat on January 27, 1997. Attached to this report are the minutes of the January 27, 1997, Planning Commission meeting. ISSUES: The Commission agreed this property should be rezoned to the R-1 district, since it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Ordinance 97 -XX approving the zone change to the R-1 district. 2. Defer consideration of this item for specific reasons. 1:\96files\96subdiv\preplat\windstar\windcc2.doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fa.x (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RECOMMENDATION: ACTION REQUIRED: EXHIBITS: 3. Deny this zone change, finding it is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and deny the request. The staff recommends Alternative #1. Motion and second to adopt Ordinance 97-XX apprOVing the zone change to the R-1 district. A 4/5 vote of the Council is required for approval of a rezoning. A. Ordinance 97 -XX (Zone Change) B. Minutes of January 27, 1997, Planning Commission Meeting 1:\96files\96subdiv\preplat\windstar\windcc2.doc Page 2 EXHIBIT A CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ORDINANCE NO. 97-XX AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5-2-1 OF PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE AND AMENDING SECTION 2.1 OF PRIOR LAKE ZONING ORDINANCE 83-6. The City Council of the City of Prior Lake does hereby ordain: The Prior Lake Zoning map, referred to in Prior Lake City Code Section 5-2-1 and Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance No. 83-6 Section 2.1, is hereby amended to change the zoning classification of the following legally described property from A-I (Agriculture) to R-I (Suburban Residential). LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section II, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of said Northwest Quarter distant 842.84 feet southerly of the Northeast corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence North 000 19' 09" east along said east line a distance of 842.84 feet to the Northeast corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence West along the North line of said Northwest Quarter a distance of 715.31 feet to a point distant 1924.78 feet east of the Northwest corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence South 19027' 00" east a distance of 100.00 feet; thence South 170 20' 48" East a distance of 99.48 feet; thence South 160 32' 58" East a distance of 99.67 feet; thence South 170 II' 00" East a distance of 210.0 feet more or less to the Northeast corner of the plat of O'Rourke Addition; thence South 170 II' 00" East along the easterly line of said Addition and its southerly extension a distance of 380.00 feet to a point 80.00 feet southerly as measured along the southerly extension of the easterly line of said Addition; thence South 72049' 00" West parallel with the southerly line of said Addition a distance of 218.4 feet more or less to the center line of a Township Road; thence southeasterly along said center line to its intersection with a line which bears South 530 28' 40" West from the point of beginning; thence North 530 28' 40" East a distance of 600.66 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 13.95 acres more or less. AND That part of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of Section II, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of the plat of O'Rourke Addition; thence Southerly along the Southerly extension of the Easterly line of said Addition a distance of 40.00 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence continuing Southerly along said extension a distance of 40.00 feet; thence southwesterly parallel with the Southerly line of said 1: \96 files\96subdiv\prep 1at\ windstar\ord97xx.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 Addition a distance of 218.4 feet more or less to the center line of a Township Road; thence Northerly along said center line a distance of 40.00 feet to its intersection with a line parallel with and distant 40.00 feet Southerly of the Southerly line of said Addition; thence Northeasterly along said line to the point of beginning. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. Passed by the City Council of the City of Prior Lake this 17th day of March, 1997. ATTEST: City Manager Mayor Published in the Prior Lake American on the _ day of , 1996. Drafted By: Prior Lake Planning Department 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Prior Lake, MN 55372 I :\96fi1es\96subdiv\preplat\windstar\ord97xx.doc PAGE 2 ---c-;;r-- :orr EXHIBIT B PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 27,1997 1. Call to Order: The January 27, 1997, Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman Criego at 6:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Criego, Stamson, V onhof and Kuykendall, Director of Planning Don Rye, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, Planner Jenni Tovar, Engineering Technician Jeff Evens and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2. Roll Call: V onhof Wuellner Stamson Kuykendall Criego Present Absent Present Present Present 3. Approval of Minutes: Change on Page 2, under Criego, should be changed to "His only concern with the sign that it was not directed towards the residents and faces Highway 13." MOTION BY VONHOF, SECONDED BY STAMSON, TO APPROVE THE JANUARY l3, 1997, MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. Vote taken signified ayes by Criego, Stamson and V onhof. MINUTES APPROVED. Commissioner Kuykendall abstained from voting. 4. Public Hearings: A. Case #96-126 and #96-113 Consider the Zone Change Request and Preliminary Plat for the Project Known as "Windstar Addition". Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the information from the Staff Report. The hearing was to consider two applications for the development of the 14.14 acre site to be divided into 21 lots, located along the east side of Mushtown Road, directly west of Wood ridge Estates and east of O'Rourke Addition. The first application is a request to rezone the property from the A-I (Agricultural) district to the R-I (Suburban Residential) district. The second application is a request for a preliminary plat to be known as "Windstar Addition". Staff recommended approval of the requests by Resolution 97-03PC with nine conditions set forth in the Staff Report. A letter was submitted on Friday, January 24, by Westwood Professional Services addressing items 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8. Kansier further recommended maintaining conditions 1,3,4 and 9 as well as 7 regarding the Tree Preservation Ordinance. MNOI2191.00c PAGEl Comments from the Public: Tim Erkkila, Westwood Professional Services, represented Wensmann Realty stated they were looking forward to working with the City. The project is a logical outgrowth of the existing streets and utilities in the area. He agreed with the Staff Report and accepted the conditions. Mr. Erkkila's concern was an issue of adjusting or moving the storm water pond to another location. They will meet the condition but are still evaluating the situation. Terry Wensmann from Wensmann Homes was also present to answer any questions. Jim Ericson, 4544 Pondview Trail, lives in the Woodridge Estates, is not opposed to the development but had concerns and submitted them in writing. His neighbors would like to keep the cul-de-sac and minimize the traffic. It is a quiet neighborhood and would like to keep it quiet. Their preference would be to work with the City and the developer by maintaining property values. Roger Olson, 17041 Mushtown Road, questioned the sewer and water coming to the center line of Mushtown Road. Kansier explained the services. Jeff Evens from the Engineering Department explained the sewer and water plan from the preliminary plat. Jim Gustin, 4543 Pondview Trail, agreed with Mr. Ericson's proposed plan. He is opposed to running the lots down to the pond. Mr. Gustin feels it is an environmental issue and would like to see the pond left natural. Deb Rickard, 17266 Toronto Avenue, agreed with the comments regarding the traffic. She felt the Wildlife should be preserved. If the lawns are extended too far into the pond there is a danger of pesticide runoff. Tim Kaderlik, 17075 Maple Lane, was concerned with added traffic and assessments to maintain Mushtown Road. He said he could not afford to live in Scott County. He moved to a semi-rural area and would like to maintain that lifestyle. There is a lot of wildlife. Mr. Kaderlik suggested eliminating the plan totally. The public hearing was closed. Comments from the Commissioners: Criego: . Questioned the property going into the pond and the adjoining property owners. MN012797.DOC PAGE 2 · Kansier explained the area was designated as park. Someone has to take responsibility for the outlot. The City would be responsible for maintaining the land and there is no access. · Rye commented on the original plat for W oodridge Estates allowed 100% dedication for wetlands. The Ordinance was amended a few months ago and the subdivision currently does not give any credit for wetlands. . Concern for the responsibility of the new property owners to the pond. . Kansier commented the wetland would stay the same. · Any assessments to other neighbors? Evens said there are no assessments to Spring Lake Township property owners. · The Comprehensive Plan requires road connections from neighborhood to neighborhood. · Rye explained the importance of the connection - Emergency vehicles, isolating neighborhoods and maintenance. · Sidewalks not recommended because they do not go anywhere. · Lots I and 2 will be difficult to build on. The pad has to be 30 feet from the 100 year flood elevation. Will meet ordinance requirements. V onhof: · Believes the sidewalks are for traffic safety and not necessarily for commuting people from one place to another. There should be sidewalks as part of the roadway. . Ratio for wetland mitigation is 2 to 1. . Evens explained the first exemption and credit for the N.U.R.P. pond. · Capital Improvements for Mushtown Road are scheduled to be upgraded in 1997. · Regarding N.U.R.P. pond -lots 5, 6 and 7. Will be covered with drainage and utility easements. . Extension of lot lines - should be consistent with the whole pond area. Would approve the previous submission without the lot line extensions. He feels it is presumptuous at this point for the City to know what is gong to happen to this wetland. Keep it whole under one body. Stamson: . Agreed with V onhof regarding the sidewalks. Concern of traffic is a good safety issue. . Agreed with Commissioners on not extending the lot lines. It makes sense for the City to own all or none of the wetland. . No cul-de-sac. It is not practical. The length from Mushtown Road is too long and difficult to service. It would be distinctly separated from the City. . Supports the street connection. . Mushtown Road is not a county road just a street in the county. It would make more sense to have a 85 foot setback. Mushtown Road can potentially turn into a collector street. MN012797.DOC PAGEJ Kuykendall: . Kansier pointed out the road connections on the overheads. . He does not feel there is an excessive amount of traffic compared to other streets in subdivisions. . Strongly favors sidewalks. Use the safety standards. . Connect the neighborhoods. . Street lighting has to be provided by the developer. . The wildlife and rural atmosphere can be maintained by the design. . Kansier explained by extending the lot lines the City is not responsible for maintaining the area. It would be the property owners responsibility as opposed to the City. Easements would have to go over properties. . Support not extending the lot lines. . Support the R1 designation. . Wetland mitigation would have to be calculated before approval. . Price range of homes - $150,000 to $180,000. . Mr. Ericson explained the benefit of Outlot B to discourage traffic offMushtown. Mr. Erkkila explained the developer will be using sound planning techniques with the Wetland Act and city policies. Some people do prefer small lots on a wetland area. There is a very small amount of fill. It is an attractive home site. It is in character with other homes off Mushtown Road. This is a low density plan with 21 lots. Evens said the components have to be met. The engineering department feels the lots are appropriate. Open Discussion: Criego: . Commissioners generally believe the district should be R1. . Development here is desirable but protect the wetlands and consensus is not to extend the lot lines. . Cul-de-sac or a through street. Cul-de-sacs cannot exceed 500 feet. The plan is to connect neighborhoods. . General consensus that sidewalks are desired. Kuykendall: . Could this site be a PUD? If it is, could it be developed as a whole different concept. . Opposed to the development based on this issue. . In favor of sidewalks on both sides and future extensions. . Increase right of way and have sidewalks. Stamson: . The traffic issue is short term until Toronto is connected. . Evens explained the annexation with the Mushtown Road improvement. MNOll797.00c PAGE4 .-;- .. Kansier said Pondview is not wide enough to add one sidewalk. V onhof: . Supportive of the development with one sidewalk. . The road should continue through. . Opposes lot extensions to pond. Stamson: · Rye said the ordinance was amended a year ago to put in sidewalk or trails on collector streets, not side streets like Pondview and Toronto. . Supports the sidewalks. · Rye said his concern is applying sidewalks as a condition. First of all, there is no criteria. Second, is that going to be a recommendation on every plat and street that comes in? Council has given the City direction and staff is proceeding on that basis. V onhof: . Sidewalks are a safety issue and starting out with a new plat, there should be a sidewalk. Erkkila said they discussed the sidewalk issue. Neighbors were against the trails around the ponds. There was no connection for sidewalks. If the developer has to increase the right-of-way it will impact the wetland on a fill issue. It is a complicated issue. The criteria based on city policy does not require a sidewalk. City Council has not agreed to it. He would be willing to accept the possibility of a sidewalk connection if it was agreed by the residents in W oodridge Estates, at least the first two lots to get to the comer. So at least it starts at a street and ends at a street. Mr. Ericson said he discussed the sidewalk issue among the neighbors and it is not desirable to have a sidewalk going through their yards. MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY STAMSON, TO RECOMME1'-l'D A ZONE CHANGE TO THE R-l DISTRICT AS REQUESTED. V ote taken signified ayes. MOTION CARRIED. Comments on the Preliminary Plat. Criego - The issues are Items, 1,3,4, 7, 8 and 9. Agrees with Resolution 97-03PC with Items 1,3,4,6 and 9. Item 8, recommend not extend the lot lines into the pond. As far as the sidewalk is concern, he would rather live without a sidewalk and do any further damage to the ponds and if it doesn't go any place, it is not needed. MN012797.DOC PAGES Vonhof - Agreed with amendments deleting 8. As far the sidewalks go, it is a traffic safety issue. There should be sidewalks. Require to extend the right-of-way to 55 feet and add a sidewalk on one side. Stamson - Agreed with Criego, space problem with the south side of property for sidewalks and also the right-of-way is not wide enough. It will create problems with homes 20 feet away. Traffic is not an issue. Given the way the Ordinance is written and City Council's decision there is no need for a sidewalk. Kuykendall- Agreed with all points. Feels right-of-way should be redesigned and add sidewalks. He does not agree with City Council's decision on sidewalks. Supports a 55' design and entertains an alternative way of developing the land to meet the bigger and broader objectives. He realizes the requirements are met and feels the property should be developed but the approach taken does not meet the overall objective. Opposed the development as proposed. MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO APPROVE RES. 97-03PC WITH CONDITIONS 1,3,4,7 AND 9. THE REVISED PLAN COVERS ITEMS 2,5 AND 6. OUTLOT A SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE PLAN AND THE PROPERTY LINES SHOULD NOT EXTEND TO THE MIDDLE OF THE POND FOR CONTINUITY WITH THE OTHER HALF OF THE POND. V ote taken signified ayes by Criego, Stamson and V oOOof, nay by Kuykendall. MOTION PASSED. A recess was called at 8:06 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:14 p.m. B. Case #97-001, #92-002 and #97-003 Zone Change Request, A Variance Request and a Preliminary Plat for the Project Known as "Knob Hill North". The public hearing was open at 8:14 p.m. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Staff Report. The hearing was to consider three applications for the development of 27 lots on a 17.0 I acre site located about 1/4 mile south ofCR 42, and 1/8 mile east of Pike Lake Trail, and formerly known as the Twiss property. The first application is a request to rezone the property from the C-l (Conservation) district to the R-l (Suburban Residential) district. The second application is a request for a variance to the lot width provisions for two of the lots proposed in the subdivision. The third application is a request for a preliminary plat to be known as "Knob Hill North". Staff recommended approval of the requests with the conditions outlined in the Staff Report. Comments from the Public: Horst Graser, representing Wayne Fleck, highlighted some of the issues: the boundary and topo maps of the site, the encroachments on the property, the wooded pine area, the elevations, sewer and water, zoning, the grading plan, the variance request and the tree consideration. Mr. Graser MN012797.DOC PAGE 6