HomeMy WebLinkAbout8B - Eagle Creek Villas PUD
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
STAFF AGENDA REPORT
8B
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE SCHEMATIC PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW AN ASSISTED LIVING
FACILITY PROJECT IN THE PRIORVIEW PUD
JUNE 2, 1997
The purpose of this item is to consider approval of the
Schematic Planned Unit Development to add approximately
one acre of land to the original PUD site, and to allow the
construction of a 61-unit assisted living facility and a 28 unit
market rate senior rental building on the vacant portion of the
Priorview PUD. This property is located directly north of the
intersection of Five Hawks Avenue and Priorview Street in the
vicinity of Eagle Creek Villas.
Eagle Creek Villas LLC has submitted an application for an
amendment to the Priorview PUD. The schematic plan for the
Priorview PUD, which allowed 106 units, was originally
approved in 1982. The original plan also provided a street
connection from Five Hawks Avenue to Cates Street, and
preservation of site amenities, such as the woodland and
wetlands on the western portion of the site. In 1983, the first
phase of 48 units was approved, and in 1991, the second
phase of 20 units was approved. There has been no other
construction on this site since 1991. In the meantime, the
project and land ownership have changed hands.
In September, 1996, the Council approved Resolution #96-90,
approving an amendment to the PUD which would replace the
38 townhouse/apartment units which were originally
contemplated with a 61-unit assisted living facility. The
approval of this amendment was subject to eight conditions
listed in the resolution. The developer never submitted the
necessary documents for preliminary plan approval of this
PUD.
The current proposal is very similar to the earlier amendment.
The major difference is the addition of one acre of land, and
the proposal for a future 28 unit senior rental building. The
plan does attempt to address the eight conditions listed in
1:\97files\97puds\eaglepud\eaglecc.doc Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQl'AL OPPORTl'NITY Erv1PLOYER
Resolution 96-90.
DISCUSSION:
The Planning Commission conducted the public hearing related
to this application on May 12, 1997. The Planning Report and
Planning Commission minutes are attached to the agenda
packet.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of this
amendment to the Schematic PUD plan, subject to an
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan related to density.
ISSUES:
The PUD was reviewed according to the applicable provisions
of Zoning Ordinance 83-6, and found to be consistent with the
Zoning Ordinance requirements for the development of a PUD,
especially the provisions promoting the preservation and
enhancement of desirable site characteristics and open space,
and the more efficient use of land and open space. The PUD
is also consistent with the Housing Chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan, specifically in that it will enable the City
to make substantial progress toward the attainment of Livable
Community goals related to lifestyle housing. The proposed
land use is also compatible with the development in the area.
A Comprehensive Plan Amendment will likely be required to
deal with the density issue.
When the Council reviewed the Schematic PUD in September,
1996, one of the issues discussed was the School District's
interest in the wetland and wooded portion of this site for use
as a nature education area. At that time, the Council
determined the developer and School District could install, at
their own expense, any trails included in this area. These trails
were not a required component of the PUD plan, or of the City
Comprehensive Plan. While the proposed plan does not show
these trails, it does not necessarily eliminate them either. The
plan shows the area as open space; nature trails is an
appropriate use of the open space. The decision on whether
or not to convey this property to the School District, and in
what manner, is up to the Developer. The PUD plan will still
maintain the area as open space, and any change to this
designation will require an amendment to the plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt Resolution 97-XX approving the Schematic PUD
subject to the conditions listed therein, or with conditions
specified by the Council.
2. Continue the review for specific information or reasons per
City Council discussion.
3. Find the PUD inconsistent with the purpose and intent of
I: \97files \97puds \eaglepud\eag Ieee. doe
Page 2
RECOMMENDA TION:
ACTION REQUIRED:
REPORT
ATTACHMENTS:
the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and/or
Comprehensive Plan and deny the project.
Approve Alternative #1. The Schematic PUD is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan in all respects except density, the
Zoning Ordinance, and the Subdivision Ordinance and should
therefore be approved.
A motion to adopt Resolution 97 -XX approving the Schematic
PUD plan, subject to the conditions contained therein. The
resolution requires approval by a 2/3 vote of the Council.
1. Resolution 97-XX
2. Planning Report dated M?9 12, 1997
3. Minutes of May 12, 1997, Planning Commission Meeting
/l
1/.~ \
! ,~
~\vv I
Reviewed BY7)BO~ es, City Manager
/
I: \97files \97 p uds\eag lepud\eag leee.doe
Page 3
RESOLUTION 97-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE
SCHEMATIC PUD FOR EAGLE CREEK ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY
MOTION BY: SECOND BY:
WHEREAS: the Prior Lake Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 12, 1997,
to consider the application from Eagle Creek Villas LLC, for Schematic PUD
approval for Eagle Creek Villas Assisted Living Facility; and the Planning
Commission afforded persons interested in this issue an opportunity to present their
views and objections related to the Schematic PUD of Eagle Creek Villas Assisted
Living Facility; and
WHEREAS: notice of the public hearing on said Schematic P.UD was duly published In
accordance with applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and
WHEREAS: the City Council finds the Schematic PUD is consistent with certain elements of the
Comprehensive Plan and inconsistent with others; and
WHEREAS: the City Council finds the Schematic PUD of Eagle Creek Villas Assisted Living
Facility is in harmony with both existing and proposed development in the area
surrounding the project; and
WHEREAS: the City Council finds the proposed Schematic PUD of Eagle Creek Villas Assisted
Living Facility is compatible with the stated purposes and intent of the PUD section
of the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS: the City Council finds the proposed Schematic PUD of Eagle Creek Villas Assisted
Living Facility adequately provides for internal organization, uses, circulation,
public facilities, recreation areas and open space.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR
LAKE, MINNESOTA, that it hereby approves the Schematic PUD for Eagle Creek Villas Assisted
Living Facility as shown on the plans identified as Exhibit A and dated "Received, April 11, 1997"
subject to the following conditions:
1. Further action to approve this PUD is conditioned upon the revision of the Comprehensive Plan
to permit the requested density on the site.
2. The developer and school district are to install, at their expense, any trails not addressed in the
Parks and Trail component of the Comprehensive Plan.
l:\97tiles\97puds\eaglepud\rs97xxcc.doc Page I
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
MOTION BY:
SECOND BY:
Passed and adopted this 2nd day of June, 1997.
YES NO
Andren Andren
Greenfield Greenfield
Kedrowski Kedrowski
Mader Mader
Schenck Schenck
{Seal}
City Manager
City of Prior Lake
1:\97 files\97puds\eaglepud\rs97xxcc.doc
Page 2
PLANNING REPORT
SITE:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
4A
CONSIDER SCHEMATIC PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT PLAl~ TO ALLOW AN ASSISTED
LIVING PROJECT IN THE PRIORVIEW PUD
FIVE HAWKS AVENUE AND PRIORWOOD STREET
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
X YES NO-N/A
--
MAY 12, 1997
AGENDA ITElYI:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION:
Eagle Creek Villas LLC has applied for an amendment to the Priorview PUD to add
approximately one acre of land (Lots 2,3 and 4, Holly Court) to the original PUD site, to
allow the construction of a 61 unit assisted living building and a 28 unit market rate
senior rental building on the vacant portion of the site. The original PUD was approved
in 1983 and the development to date has occurred prior to 1991. The present applicant
has no connection with the developer of the original PUD.
BACKGROUND:
The Priorview PUD was preceded by Council action in 1981 which rezoned the subject
property to R-3, High Density residential. This would have permitted 210 units on the
15.05 acres of buildable land on the site. In December of 1982, the Council approved a
Schematic PUD plan which provided for 106 units, a street connection from Five Hawks
Avenue to Cates Street and preservation of site amenities. In September of 1983, the
Council approved the first phase of the development consisting of 48 townhomes.
Priorview Second Addition consisting of 20 units, was approved in 1991.
In 1987, the developer asked the City to consider expansion of the PUD to include the so-
called Holly Court property to the north and increase the number of units to 148. The
Planning Commission recommended denial of the request and the application was with -
drawn.
There has been no construction activity on this site for several years. In September, 1996,
the Council approved Resolution 96-90, approving an amendment to the Schematic Plan
for the Priorview PUD, to allow a 61 unit assisted living facility. This amendment was
1:\97files\97puds\eaglepud\eaglepc.doc Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.L Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQL;AL OPPORTl;;'ilTY E\.1PLOYER
subject to the eight conditions listed in the attached resolution. The developer never
submitted the necessary documents for preliminary plan approval of this PUD.
DISCUSSION:
This application is very similar to the earlier Schematic PUD plan. The major difference
is the addition of an acre of land, and the addition of a future 28 unit senior rental
building. The earlier application included some issues which must also be addressed at
this time. These issues are as follows:
Densitv: The original PUD was approved at a gross density of 6.07 units per acre and a
net density of 7.04 units per acre. The first 2 phases consisting of 68 units were built on
approximately 5 acres of land with a net density of 13.6 units per acre which was
consistent with the previous R-3 zoning. The remaining 8.5 acres were to contain 38
units at 4.47 units per acre. It seems clear that the intent was to concentrate the units on
the relatively low amenity part of the site in order to preserve as much of the wooded and
wetland area as possible.
The new proposal would have a total of 89 units on 9.5 acres for a density of 9.37 units
per acre which is greater than the original overall density of the original PUD, but
consistent with the previous R-3 zoning.
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning: The Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan designated the
subject property for Medium Density Residential use, which suggested densities of 4 to 8
units per acre. The Year 20 I 0 Plan recently adopted shows the property as Low Density
Residential which has a maximum density if 3.5 units per acre. The comparable zoning
would be R-I, Single Family Residential. However, the site is still subject to the PUD
zoning. Conceivably, the 38 units allowed on the northerly portion of the site could be
built under R-I zoning but not as apartment buildings as approved. Changing to
townhouses on this property would also entail an amendment to the PUD. Because the
proposed development would result in densities greater than those contemplated by the
current plan, it seems that a Comprehensive Plan amendment may be necessary if the
applicant is to proceed. If such an amendment were to be pursued, it would seem likely
that the amendment could be limited in such a way as to limit development of the' .
property to something similar to the proposed project to insure that the development
intensity of the site is limited.
Streets/Trails: The original PUD called for the extension of Five Hawks Avenue
northward to Cates Street to provide a convenient north-south for residents of the Five
Hawks neighborhood. When the Council approved the earlier amendment in 1996, they
required an 8' wide bituminous pedestrianlbike trail connection between Five Hawks
Avenue and Cates Street. The Council also reiterated the City would retain the current
easements. The current plan does not include any new public streets, but does provides
this trail.
I: \97 fi I es\9 7 puds\eaglepud\eaglepc. doc
Page 2
Parks/Open Space: The proposal as presented does preserve a significant portion of the
site in its natural state. The School District has also indicated an interest in the wetland
and wooded portion of _the site adjacent to Five Hawks School for use as a nature
education area. They envision trails and instructional areas within this portion of the site.
When this proposal was discussed in 1996, the Council determined the developer and
School District could install, at their own expense, any trails included in this nature area.
These trails were not a required component of this PUD plan, or of the City
Comprehensive Plan.
One problem which potentially exists with regard to school use of the land is related to
density. Staff has no objection to the use of the property by the School District, as long
as the land is still tied to the development. The property may even be conveyed to the
School District, with the understanding that it is not buildable.
Utilities: Utilities are reasonably available and adequate to serve the subject property,
although there is a need for a water connection through the site to provide for a loop to
the north. The proposed plans provide this connection.
Parking/Traffic: The site plan attached to the application shows 65 parking stalls on the
site, with space available for an additional 37 spaces. This equals 1.15 paces per unit; the
Zoning Ordinance presently requires one space per unit for elderly housing.
Residents of the Facilitv: Resolution 96-90 required the developer to identify the
residents of the assisted living facility since there is no definition for this use in the
Zoning Ordinance. The narrative submitted by the applicant identifies the users of this
facility as senior citizens.
At this time, the Planning Commission should make a recommendation on whether or not
the proposed use of this property for a 6l-unit assisted living facility and a 28 unit senior
rental building is appropriate. The specific design features of the proposal, such as
landscaping, wetland mitigation and so forth, will be addressed in the future phases of the
PUD process.
If the Planning Commission believes this is an appropriate request for the proposed
location, the following should be kept in mind:
. A Comprehensive Plan amendment will likely be required to deal with the density
issue.
. The proposal will enable the City to make substantial progress toward the attainment
of Livable Communities goals related to lifestyle housing.
. The proposed use is compatible with the development in the vicinity.
I :\97files\97 pudsleaglepud\eaglepc.doc
Page 3
AL TERNA TIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the Schematic Plan, subject to a Comprehensive Plan
amendment related to density.
2. Recommend denial of the request.
3. Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning staff recommends Alternative 1.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Motion and second to recommend approvals of the Schematic Plan, subject to a
Comprehensive Plan amendment related to density
1:\97 files\9 7 puds\eaglepud\eaglepc. doc
Page 4
.' .,.
1-
I - '.'
I
, I
'\
~ I-~ '
I ~
1-
~HV!~\.Uj
,11.'rj~J,~:~ -I
;\ l__ .Ll,..x
, ,;
. I -! u
I ..
I";"
wL
i -
/
,..
L i
.1- i:
l\~ea1'f
LCU\TI~N
\ } I~
:'.11.....
I_" _
--'-=--_(lFARY
.r I./IkF
CITY OF PRIOR
BASE MAP LAKE
JA..........Jn' 1'"
~_-r
1.Clll
rieke
carroll
muller
associates, inc.
engineers
arcnitects
land sUNeyors
equal opportunity
employer
April 1 0, 1997
City of Prior Lake
Attn: Jane Kansier
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Submittal of Schematic Plan for Eagle Creek Estates
Priorview PUD
RCM File No. 30443
Dear Jane:
Enclosed is the application for submittal of a Schematic Plan for Eagle Creek
Estates in the Priorview PUD for the Assisted Living Facility proposed to be
developed by Eagle Creek Villas, LLC. The Schematic Plan shows a 61-unit
Assisted Living Facility and a 28-unit Market Rate Senior Rental Building.
The owners of the land are John Mesenbrink and Larry Gensmer; the name of their
company is Eagle Creek Villas, LLC.
The 61-unit assisted living facility would be a three-story wood framed building that
would contain dining facilities, community spaces, kitchen, offices, and spaces for
support services. A covered portico at the main entry becomes the focal point of
the building and acts as a sheltered drop-off during inclement weather. The main
entry would face to the south and the building would follow the natural grade of the
site to provide a walkout design on the north side.
As we look to the future, providing care to seniors will require greater and greater
investment in developing a continuum of care beyond the traditional care center
model. An assisted living environment allows residents the freedom and privacy of
their own apartment on a month to month rental basis and the opportunity to
purchase additional services as needed. The environment offers choices for those
individuals who need varying levels of support and services. Residents have the
freedom to pursue an active social life, entertain family and friends and continue to
make choices in a safe, comfortable, and secure environment.
The 28-unit Senior Rental Building would be located to the southwest of the 61-unit
building. The 28-unit building is located adjacent to the wooded area and is situated
to try to preserve as many of the trees as possible. Both buildings would be served
by the parking lot and drive aisles that would occupy the southeast portion of the
site. Access would be provided from Five Hawks Avenue and Priorwood Street
which intersect along the south edge of the site.
217 north third street
DOSt office box 776
gaylord, minnesota 55334-0776
(507) 237-2924
metro 338-2800
1 (800) 838-8666
fax (507) 237-5516
City of Prior Lake
Page 2
April 10, 1997
The developers intend to construct the Assisted Living Facility during the summer
and fall of 1997. -The phasing plan identifies that the northwest wing of the Assisted
Living Facility would be constructed in the future. The 28-unit Senior Rental
Building is also shown as a future building.
Several wetlands are located on this site. The wetlands help control runoff and treat
storm water runoff before discharging into Prior Lake, which is located 1000 feet to
the northwest. The small wetland located in the southeast comer of the site is
proposed to be filled. The developer intends to mitigate the loss of the wetland on
this site by expanding the other wetlands.
An 8' bituminous trail is shown to be constructed along the roadway easement of
Five Hawks Avenue. The trail will need to cross the creeks in two locations and
culverts wiil be needed at each crossing.
The preliminary utility plan shows the looping of an 8" watermain from Five Hawks
Avenue/Priorwood Street to Cates Avenue. The developer is requesting that the
City fund a portion of the construction of the watermain that would be constructed
off site.
The developers intend to retain ownership of the development. The developer will
install all necessary public utilities and they will construct the parking lot. The
parking lot would be designed to provide one parking space for each unit approved
by the City.
The anticipated population that will occupy the units on this site will primarily be
senior citizens. The units will be a mixture of studio, one bedroom, and two
bedroom facilities. Each unit will contain its own bathroom and kitchen appliances.
There will be a laundry room on each floor.
We hope that this submittal allows the City to process the Schematic Plan through
the Planning Commission and City Council. If you need additional information,
please call.
Sincerely,
RIEKE CARROLL MULLER ASSOCIATES, INC.
~'W~
John Wingard
JW/du
c: John Mesenbrink
Encls.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
That part of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter 0N Y2 of SW 1/4) of Section 2, Township 114,
Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, lying North of a line commencing at the southwest corner of
the West Half of the Southwest Quarter; thence North along the west line thereof 2080.5 feet to the
point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 88 degrees 51 minutes 30 seconds
East to the east line of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter and there terminating.
ALSO:
Lots 3, 4, and 5, Block 2, HOLLY COURT, according to the recorded plat thereof,
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the plats of SPRING BROOK PARK, SPRING BROOK PARK 2ND
ADDITION, PRIORV1EW FIRST ADDITION and PRIORV1EW SECOND ADDITION.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM A 66.00 FOOT ROADWAY & UTILITY EASEMENT PER DOC.
NO. 197652.
Page 2 of 2
u >-
-l f-
-l- Z
---I
~- 0
Vl u I-
c:t: c:t:
---I l.J.... -<
---I >
...... <!i W
>:2: ...J
- W
~>
U-J - I
U-J ---I I-
~ ::J
u Cl 0
U-J
U-J f- en
---I Vl
<!i -
c:t: Vl
U-J Vl
c:t:
u >-
--l f-
--l -
--l Z
ft_
en u 0
c::: c::: f-
--l L1...
--l <
-C.!:l >
>z w
- -l
::.:::> w
I.LJ -
I.LJ --l I-
~ en
u Cl W
I.LJ ~
I.LJ f-
--l en
C.!:l-
c::: en
I.LJ en
c:::
EAGLE CRE~K
ASSISTED tI\ VILLAS, LLC
lING FACILITY
II :.;cc
- -1
l'OttI s. E
I
_-L
--~
I
I
I
: ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
__~ (1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- -.I
I '
I :
I
I
I
I
~ I ~
il I
'~ I
"0
'.)
J
1111
'\\ I~
.,:")
\t ,
,
,
,
~ ,
,
:J ,
UZ ,
-<(z
to.-
2:
<.:l
zLoi
-~
~j
CIa::
lo.lO
1--
Vla::
Via..
VlZ
-<(-
-,
I
,- ~
_0
)('J ~~ L.:::~
i\ ~ li~~~ rl~-"
~.. c::;l - ~.
;~ ~ 0- ~~ .~
" .V ~ s "~
~ <3 -"1-
;.......~ ~f~ Q1!J .=---- u' "
__z.~' A;=-> 9,
~~___Jf.?C_
II
; I ..
: I g I
'/1 ~ f
:/ i I
I '.. I
/1 /
: /
'~Y.
"'. ~~}.
.q~~
.:~
'1,j.,
~-
., . ~
! _. r :1
i.l!!!!a
,:H I II
s.nh .f~
~~li'lll~
~r"h:~.~
'''!:J'h"
W:idrj:
I_III] al
jJ"' Ilg2
~,h~;.i
Ifl'I'!'U . ·
~J.; f ~~5' II!
i.tIJ~': I ,. i
It I~~~l~: j I l J
E-< I.lil.t!'" ! I · . .
-< ,;,:,,:,~if' i"!!
...:l ii!l!ls.;~ II" : · 1 · ·
1"1 JI':I:gg: ~ ~ f
_ I. Ihi~i~ ~; .. i 3
>0" 5_~H
,yS -IHP
:;p p :~d
z g dll
-
:::s
-
...:l
t:il
p:;
0..
It; i
~.j ~ j-
'1" '
Ii Ii bdi!
~I~ ~I' 11l 'I ~
m ~!~! Ii I~ ~J.
.'u I;;
~ ~ ~ I I
1 1 i ~ ~I
. 1 1 ,; . ~
Ii' ' i! J
! I loll
nil !
'&
-'
~,
~ .
~:
:=
~
'"
ls:)WO O"'ZI'8 '6-11-"
3adE".oc\Cl"IrOC\~J-]
"'1IJ'f)\..q._~~,t1Se.p\.e
I
__1-
__.J
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--~ ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--J
Z
<{
~
w
o
<{
z .....
<{ ~
0::: ~
o
I '
I :
f-~
1- ~
III I
~ :
I
I
~
oJ
ul
c~
.<
t1 .'
.f~;' '.~ ~b\--, i--{'~'l
L u.> = -'t ~..
~! ~I .", ~
".~!li, ;@ " '
.,r 5.~~ I I'"
-h~--__L
j
III I
l~
'{i
v:~
\1
~
<l
~
J
'~Q,
'~:''"")
\"0.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.:' )
11 ~_." I
_.. fi" I
-<] i !: I
.1 I
- - _I __
t=.:."
, -_L
,/ -
/\
~
:J
UZ
<(z
...-
:::I:
<:)
Z .
-.....
>~
:Jj
o a::
loJo
~-
VIa::
iilll..
~~
.;>.
"~"'l
.:,,-* -~s-
'~"t>.
~/
~
~ ll..
loJ
U
Z
0 0
Z u
0
<{
0::: --
C)
>-
0::
-<
Z
-
::s
::3
t:t:l
0::
0..
~;
"'-I
~L
-'
~
" .
~:
:2
~
"
~..
~"~
"' '
~~
iSJWO <;&>2'-8 L6-II-t
)~dEttOC\U>.OC\.!SJ- ]~
J\'""1)"....d'\tI~e.P\re
'.q"
"'/""1
a., "'V}.-
'00:'1
#:,~ ~~
-:,;,
~/----
j
IIlI
--t,\ l~
"
-~
.L
~ ,
::J ,
,
Liz ,
,
<(z ,
....- ,
::I
t:l ,
zw ,
-:><:
~j
c~
10.10
1--
Vl~
iija...
VlZ
<(-
/1:1.:'1
~
il
i
.
\
(,)C"J
\>l.
~ ~l
!l \>l
<1l
.L
~~
,,/'
I
/
z
<(
-.J
Cl..
>-
I-
-.J
I-
::J~
<(
I-
(f)
I-
a...
l.o.J
u
Z
o
u
C"~
>-
~
<
Z
-
:::s
-
~
~
~
p..
~ .
~..
i
~
"
1$:1.... ;&02"'8 (6-11-"
)~tt>OE\.E""OC\1S:I-J
""I'JYJ\~'O^""d'IISe._,r8
.f
RESOLUTION 96-90
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE
SCHEMATIC PUD FOR PIUORVIEW PUD TO ALLOW ASSISTED LIVING
PROJECT
MOTION BY:
Andren
SECOND BY: _Mader
WHEREAS: the Prior Lake Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 22, 1996,
and August 12, 1996 to consider the application from Eagle Creek Villas LLC, for
Schematic pu~ approval for an amendment to the Priorview PuO to allow an
Assisted Living Facility; and the Planning Commission afforded persons interested
in this issue an opportunity to present their views and objections related to the
Schematic pu~ for Priorview pu~ Assisted LivingFacility; and
WHEREAS: notice of the public hearing on said Schematic PUD was duly published III
accordance with applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and
WHEREAS: the City Council finds the Schematic pu~ is consistent with certain elements of the
Comprehensive Plan and inconsistent with others; and
WHEREAS: the City Council finds the Schematic PUO for an amendment to the Priorview pu~
to allow the Eagle Creek Villas Assisted Living Facility is in harmony with both
existing and proposed development in the area surrounding the project; and
WHEREAS: the City Council finds the proposed Schematic pu~ for an amendment to the
Priorview pu~ to allow the Eagle Creek Villas Assisted Living Facility is
compatible with the stated purposes and intent of the PUD section of the Zoning
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS: the City Council finds the proposed Schematic pu~ for an amendment to the
Priorview PUD to allow the Eagle Creek Villas Assisted Living Facility adequately
provides for internal organization, uses, circulation, public facilities, recreation
areas and open space.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR
LAKE, MINNESOTA, that it hereby approves the Schematic pu~ for an amendment to the
Priorview PUD to allow the Eagle Creek Villas Assisted Living Facility subject to the following
conditions:
1. Amend the Schematic PUD plan to include a 8' wide bituminous public, non-motorized
pedestrian/bike path trail connection between Five Hawks A venue and Cates Street at the
developer's expense. The City will retain all current easements.
2. Parking at the rate of 1 space per unit (61 total spaces) must be provided and constructed with
R9690DOC PAGE 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / f-ax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
the building.
3. The extension and looping of the waterline issue needs to be resolved. The exact extension and
looping of the watermain must be determined as a part of the Final PUD Plan approval. The
criteria used to determine this location is reducing the environmental impact and still provide
adequate water pressure.-
4. The developer must identify the residents of the assisted living facility at the Final PUD Plan
approval stage.
5. The developer must provide a revised Schematic PUD plan incorporating the above items. This
plan must include the entire Priorview PUD area
6. Further action to approve this PUD is conditioned upon the following:
a) The revision of the Comprehensive Plan to permit the requested density of the site.
b) The revision of the Zoning Code to provide a definition of an assisted living facility.
c) The dedication of the trails described in Condition # 1.
7. The developer and school district are to install, at their expense, any trails currently proposed
which are not addressed in Condition # 1 above, or in the Parks and Trail component of the
Comprehensive Plan.
8. At the option of the City, lights may be installed along the Five Hawks Trail at the developer's
expense.
Passed and adopted this 3rd day of September, 1996.
YES
NO
Andren X
Greenfield X
Kedrowski X
~ader X
Schenck X
(Seal}
R%90,OQC
PAGE 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
lYlA Y 12, 1997
1. Call to Order:
The May 12, 1 97, Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman
Criego at 6:35 . . Those present were Commissioners Criego, Stamson, V onhof and
Wuellner, Directo fPlanning Don Rye, Planning C rdinator Jane Kansier, Assistant
City Engineer Sue tv ermott and Recording Seer Connie Carlson
Stamson
Kuykendall
Criego
Vonhof
Wuellner
Present
Absent
Present
Present
Present
2. Roll Call:
3.
MOTION BY \VUE
28,1997, MINUT
Vote taken siD: tIed ayes by Wuellner, Vonhofand St son. MINUTES APPROVED.
Commis . ner Criego abstained from voting.
4.
Public Hearings:
"
A. Case #97-033 Consider Schematic Planned Unit Development Plan to
allow an Assisted Living Project in the Priorview PUD.
The public hearing was opened and a sign-up sheet circulated to the public in attendance.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Staff Report dated May 12, 1997.
Eagle Creek Villas LLC applied for an amendment to the Priorview PUD to add
approximately one acre of land to the original PUD site, to allow the construction of a 61
unit assisted living building and a 28 unit market rate senior rental building on the vacant
portion of the site. The original PUD was approved in 1983 and the development to date
has occurred prior to 1991. The present applicant has no connection with the developer
of the original PUD.
The Priorview PUD was preceded by Council action in 1981 which rezoned the subject
property to R-3, High Density residential. This would have permitted 210 units on the
1:\97fi1es\97plcomm\pcmin\mn051297.doc
15.05 acres of buildable land on the site. In December of 1982, the Council approved a
Schematic PUD plan which provided for l06 units, a street connection from Five Hawks
Avenue to Cates Street and preservation of site amenities. In September of 1983, the
Council approved the first phase of the development consisting of 48 townhomes.
Priorview Second Addition consisting of 20 units, was approved in 1991.
In 1987, the developer asked the City to consider expansion of the PUD to include the so-
called Holly Court property to the north and increase the number of units to 148. The
Planning Commission recommended denial of the request and the application was with -
drawn.
There has been no construction activity on this site for several years. In September, 1996,
the Council approved Resolution 96-90, approving an amendment to the Schematic Plan
for the Priorview PUD, to allow a 61 unit assisted living facility. This amendment was
subject to the eight conditions. The developer never submitted the necessary documents
for preliminary plan approval of this PUD.
Staffrecommended approval of the request based on the following considerations:
. A Comprehensive Plan amendment will likely be required to deal with the density
Issue.
. The proposal will enable the City to make substantial progress toward the attainment
of Livable Communities goals related to lifestyle housing.
. The proposed use is compatible with the development in the vicinity.
Comments from the public:
Bryce Huemoeller, the attorney representing the developer and applicant commented the
campus concept for assisted living facilities is an important element. An independent
living building on the grounds would be necessary. One spouse could be living in the
assisted living facility while the other would live in the neighboring independent
building. The density would be consistent with the neighborhood and satisfy the
objectives of the PUD. The key element is the question of the contribution of an interest
in the land to the school district. That would be made, subject to a restriction which
would preclude development of the property so the area would be preserved for density in
this project. This issue would be resolved and the City would be given a copy of the
instrument for their records.
Pamela Nelson, 16517 Dutch Avenue SE, lives behind the wooded area and asked if the
trees and wetland would be removed with the development. Commissioner Criego
explained the proposed development and the surrounding natural area.
The public hearing was closed at 6:55 p.m.
1:\97files\97plcomm\pcmin\mn051297.doc
2
Comments from the Commissioners:
Stamson:
. Questioned the parking lot and a bufferyard. Kansier explained it was a concept plan
and the landscaping will be discussed in a future phase.
. The City is in need of a facility like this.
. In favor.
Wuellner:
. Questioned what regulations would be in place to assure this facility would remain an
assisted living facility. Rye responded the use is specified as an assisted living
project. The PUD would have to be amended.
. Concern for the school district's involvement. Huemoeller said the owners have
considered selling the property to the school district. The discussion and intention is
a conveyance to the school district in the nature of a contribution with restrictions that
would deal the density issue. The school is in the process of designing a nature
center. Also, with the density restrictions and limitations there will not be any more
room for additional living facilities. The only use will be as a natural amenity.
. Rye addressed the building sites and locations. The City's concern was for
preservation of the area.
. Would like to see the area remain natural. The restriction will be in the PUD.
. In favor of the facility. It is necessary for the community and a valuable resource.
. The street extension was eliminated in favor of a nature trail.
V onhof:
. In favor of assisted living concept.
. This is a completely different proposal.
. Questioned the three story size. Kansier responded the City can require the building
plan and expects them to be similar in appearance, size and bulk.
. This is a city-wide need.
. Agreed with Commissioner Wuellner in keeping the facility an assisted living
facility.
Criego:
. The ownerlbuilder, John Mesenbrink explained the outside design and exterior
materials as well as the site and the preservation areas.
. Debra Rose, 7725 Jennifer Lane, Prior Lake, explained the services of the home
health facility. The bulk of the services would be on a fee for service basis trom a
home health perspective. Residents would receive 2 meals per day, weekly light
housekeeping and scheduled transportation. There will be 24 hour emergency
supervision in the building, emergency cords in each room, an attendant program
would be available in the event they ran into trouble in the building, an Ri"I would be
in the building 40 hours a week, a home health agency would be in the building,
space would be leased for hairdressing, also, several assistant services would be
1:\97fiIes\97plcomm\pcmin\mnOS1297.doc
3
available to residents. The facility would cater to seniors and handi-capped
individuals. Meals would depend on the clientele.
. The time frame for the facility was addressed by Mr. Huemoeller. It could be as early
as this year, depending on the planning process. The other buildings have not been
established and would probably go into next year.
. Excellent program.
MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY WUELLNER, TO RECOMMEND
APPROV AL OF THE SCHEMATIC PLAN, SUBJECT TO A COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT RELATED TO DENSITY.
No discussion.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION APPROVED.
This matter will probably be scheduled before City Council on June 2, 1997.
5. Old Business:
A. Cas #97-028 Resolution of Denial for variance re
Partn s for property on Red Oaks Road.
Planning Coordinator
On April 28, 1997, the PI ing Commission re wed variance requests from Pinnacle
Partners proposing to const t a new single ily residence with attached garage and
deck. The Planning Commissio concurri with staff, concluded the variance requests
for lot area and width are substan . ted th hardships pertaining to the lot the applicant
has no control over. The Planning mission approved a variance to lot area and lot
width by adopting Resolution 97-01
The Planning Commission denie variance to Ordinary High Water (OHW) setback, top
of bluff setback, and bluff imp t zone. The anning Commission cited the size and
design of the structure as har hips created by t applicant which could be changed, as
well as the maximum use 0 he legal building en ope and building over the garage as
alternatives to reducing/e' inating the variance req sts. The Planning Commission
directed staff to prepare separate resolution of denial 'th findings as discussed.
MOTION BY LNER, SECOND BY STAMSON, APPROVE RESOLUTION
97-13PC DENY (1) A 23 FOOT VARIANCE REQUES TO PERMIT A 52 FOOT
SETBACK FR THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK F PRIOR LAKE (904
EL.) RATHE THAN THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 7 EET, AND (2) A 26
FOOT V 1\NCE REQUEST TO PER.J.\1IT A 4 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE TOP
OF BLUFF RATHER THAN THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 30 FEET, AND
1:\97files\97plcomm\pcmin\mn051297.doc
4
" III-