Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout081400REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, AUGUST 14, 2000 Fire Station - City Council Chambers 6:30 p.m. 2. 3. 4. e e Ao Bo Co Call Meeting to Order: Roll Call: Approval of Minutes: Public Hearings: Case #00-002 & #00-003 (continued) David Bell & Freedom Development & Consulting are requesting an amendment to the approved plan for the Priorwood Planned Unit Development (PUD 82-12) and for a preliminary plat to be known as Crcekside Estates for the property located at the intersection of Five Hawks Avenue and Priorwood Street. Case #00-00-053 Prior Lake Baptist Church is requesting a Zone Change from the current General Industrial (I-1) District to the Low Density Residential (R-1) District for the property located at 5680 and 5690 Credit River Road. Case #00-038 (continued) Consider an Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance creating an overlay district for the development of senior care facilities. Old Business: A. Continue discussion on Comprehensive Plan (Low to Medium Density). New Business: Announcements and Correspondence: Adjournment: L:\OOFILES\OOPLCOMM~00PCAGEN~o081400.DOC 16200 Ea§le Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, AUGUST 14, 2000 1. Call to Order: Chairman Vonhof called the August 14, 2000, Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Criego, Stamson and Vonhof, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, City Engineer Sue McDermott and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2. Roll Call: Vonhof Present Criego Present Atwood Present Stamson Present 3. Approval of Minutes: The Minutes from the July 24, 2000, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. 4. Public Hearings: Case//00-002 &//00-003 (continued) David Bell & Freedom Development & Consulting are requesting an amendment to the approved plan for the Priorwood Planned Unit Development (PUD 82-12) and for a preliminary plat to be known as Creekside Estates for the property located at the intersection of Five Hawks Avenue and Priorwood Street. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated August 14, 2000, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Eagle Creek Villas, LLC, and Freedom Development and Consulting have filed applications for the development of the property located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Five Hawks Avenue and Priorwood Street, directly north of Five Hawks School. The applications include a request to rezone approximately 45,000 square feet of property described as Lots 2, 3 and 4, Holly Court from the R-3 District to the R-4 District, amend the approved plan for PUD 82-12 to include the Holly Court property and to develop the site with 102 units of senior housing, and a request for approval of a preliminary plat for this site, consisting of 12.7 acres to be subdivided into 3 lots and one outlot. The Planning Commission considered this request at a public hearing on July 10, 2000. The developer submitted some revised plans at that meeting; however, due to the number L:\00FILES\00PLCOMM\00PCMINAmn081400.DOC I Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2000 of issues involved, the Planning Commission continued this item until July 24, 2000. Because the developer had not completed the revisions in time for staff review, on July 24, 2000 the Planning Commission continued this item until August 14, 2000. While the revised plans have addressed some of the issues raised by the staff, there are still several outstanding issues that remain with this proposal. Staff recommended approval of the rezoning, the PUD Preliminary Plan and the Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The building plans must be revised so at least 60% of the exterior materials of the 24- unit buildings are Class I materials. 2. The building plans must be revised so the 54-unit building is no more than 35' in height. 3. The lighting plans for the parking lots must include a design of the light fixture and a luminaire calculation to ensure the ordinance requirements are met. 4. The landscaping plan must be prepared and signed by a registered landscape architect and must be revised to meet all ordinance requirements, including numbers, size and species of the plantings. This plan must also identify whether or not an irrigation system will be provided, and an irrigation plan must be provided. 5. Identify the open space on the site plan. 6. Outlot A must be dedicated as parkland on the plat. 7. The developer must provide covenants for the congregate housing building. These covenants must be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and must be recorded with the final plat. 8. The signage plan must be revised to meet ordinance requirements. 9. All issues identified by the Engineering staff must be addressed prior to final plan approval. 10. The issues identified in the memorandum from Robert Hutchins, Building Official must be addressed prior to final approval. 11. Application for approval of a PUD Final Plan must be submitted within 90 days of the date of approval of the preliminary PUD plan by the City Council. Comments from the public: Applicant, David Bell, Freedom Development, agreed with staff that he could meet all the conditions and will do whatever it takes to make the modifications as soon as possible. Bell addressed each of staff's concerns in the Planning Report. McDermott commented on Engineering's concerns and felt those issues would be met by the developer. There were no other comments from the public. Vonhofclosed the public heating. l:\00flles\00plcomm\00pcminXmn081400.doc 2 Planning, Commission Minutes August 15, 2000 Comments from the Commissioners: Criego: · Asked staff for clarification on the building setbacks. Kansier responded. · Thc condos will be purchased, not rental. · Make sure there is a three-way stop sign at the intersection. McDermott said it could be part of the Developer's Contract. Stamson: · Thc developer has done a good job of meeting thc Commissioners' concerns. The details will be worked out. · The PUD is appropriate. Thc modifications arc appropriate as well. It saves impact on other parts of the site. · Overall, supportive of the project. Atwood: · No questions. Vonhof: · Concurred with Criego's suggestion on making a condition for a three-way stop sign. · Kansier said it would be at the discretion of the City Council. · Agreed if the conditions are met with the stop sign - the plan should go forward. Criego: · Commented on putting up a 35-foot building in the middle of a residential area. Not convinced it is not causing problems for the neighbors. · Questioned why would the City allow any structure closer than the 100-year flood plain. Bothered with the proposed distances. The concern is for the northerly setback on Lot 1 and easterly setback on Lot 3. Stamson explained the setbacks. McDermott stated they do meet the elevation requirements. There is only a small area that has not been met. Criego also questioned the trail. Kansier said it was not park land and therefore not a concern. Stamson said he was not sure the northerly setback was not met. Atwood: · Agreed there should be a three-way stop sign. · Happy to see the outlot is going to be a dedicated park. · Questioned the building and engineering departments with the additional conditions that differ from the July 10, meeting. Kansier explained many of those items need to be identified at the final plat stage. It is a way of making sure the items are addressed. Kansier said it appears there are a number of things, but most of them are design requirements. Staff does not see a problem. l:\00files\00plcomm\00pcmin\mn081400 .doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2000 Vonhof explained the calculations on the setbacks to Criego. Vonhofwas not concerned with that issue. He felt Lot 2 would have more of an encroachment. MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL REZONE APPROXIMATELY 1 ACRE (LOTS 2, 3 AND 4, HOLLY COURT) FROM THE R-3 DISTRICT TO THE R-4 DISTRICT. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS CREEKS1DE ESTATES SUBJECT TO STAFF'S CONDITIONS 1 THROUGH 12 LISTED IN THE PLANNING REPORT. ITEM 12 BEING A THREE- WAY STOP SIGN AT FIVE HAWKS AND PRIORWOOD. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS CREEKSIDE ESTATES, SUBJECT TO STAFF'S CONDITION LISTED IN THE PLANNING REPORT. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This item will be scheduled before the City Council on Tuesday, September 5, 2000. A recess was called at 7:42 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:48 p.m. A. Case #00-00-053 Prior Lake Baptist Church is requesting a Zone Change from the current General Industrial (I-l) District to the Low Density Residential (R-l) District for the property located at 5680 and 5690 Credit River Road. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated August 14, 2000, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Prior Lake Baptist Church and Judith Anderson have filed an application for a Zone Change for the property located at 5680 and 5690 Credit River Road. The request is to rezone the property from the I-1 (General Industrial) District to the R-1 (Low Density Residential) District. This property is the site of a single family home and the Prior Lake Baptist Church. Both the house and the church have existed on the site for more than 20 years. Prior to 1999, the property was zoned C-1 (Conservation). Churches and single family dwellings were a permitted use in that district. When the current Zoning Ordinance was adopted, the C-1 l:\00files\00plcomm\00pcmin\mn081400.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes ,4ugust 15, 2000 District was eliminated. This property was rezoned to the I-1 District, in conformance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. At that time, the existing use of the property became nonconforming. Staff recommended approval of the zoning change as requested. It appears this property has been improperly zoned because of its actual use is and has been residential in nature. With the proposed rezoning, the existing uses would conform to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Comments from the public: Scott Crosby, the architect for the Prior Lake Baptist Church, explained they would like to have the zoning changed to make possible future additions by the church. Comments from the Commissioners: Stamson: · This is an oversight on the map. It is appropriate to rezone. Atwood: · Agreed with Stamson. Criego: ,, Agreed with staff's recommendation. Vonhof: · Felt it was appropriate to rezone, as it is consistent with the surrounding area. MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY STAMSON, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONE CHANGE FROM THE I-1 DISTRICT TO THE R-1 DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTIES AT 5680 AND 5690 CREDIT RIVER ROAD. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY STAMSON, TO INITIATE AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN MAP FROM THE I-IP TO THE R- L/MD DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 5680 AND 5690 CREDIT RIVER ROAD. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This will go before the City Council on Tuesday, September 5, 2000. l:\OOfiles\OOplcomm\OOpcmin\mn081400.doc 5 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2000 A. Case #00-038 (continued) Consider an Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance creating an overlay district for the development of senior care facilities. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated August 14, 2000, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. On two previous occasions, the City Council has discussed the idea of senior care facilities and their treatment in the zoning ordinance. Because of the special needs of persons living in such facilities, the Council asked staff to research the issue and report on the results. Following extensive review of the planning literature, staff concluded that an overlay district approach in several zoning districts made the most sense as a way of dealing with the issue. Council concurred and referred the matter to the Planning Commission for it's review and input. Staff recommended approval of the draft ordinance. There were no comments from the public and the hearing was closed. Comments from the Commissioners: Criego: · Questioned the 20% of residents under the restricted covenants. Kansier said it is a Federal restriction. Vonhof: · Questioned why the RI district was not included. Kansier explained the RI district is mainly single family and this type of project would not be placed in an R1 district. It would be more appropriately placed in a higher density district. Stflmson: · Overall it is a good approach. · Questioned the building height as an incentive. · The sentence under "Modifications" - eliminate the word "only". The sentence should read: "Any modifications shall be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and shall be approved upon a finding that the modification does not adversely affect surrounding properties." · Asked for clarification on the height restrictions for safety. Kansier and Vonhof responded. · Suggesting a recommendation from the Fire Department. Atwood: · Agreed with the building height issue. l:\00files\00plcomm\00pcmin\mn081400.doc 6 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2000 Concemed with the incentive wording. Kansier explained the difference between incentives and modifications. It is discretionary, based on findings. The City Council has the sole discretion to make the decisions. Vonhof: · The overlay district is an important tool. · Supported staff's recommendations. MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ORDINANCE 00-XX AMENDING SECTION 1103 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE. ALSO, AMEND SECTION 1106A.600 - 5TH LINE OF THE PARAGRAPH - ELIMINATE THE WORD "ONLY" AND ADD THE WORD "SIGNIFICANTLY" SO THE SENTENCE SHOULD READ "ANY MODIFICATIONS SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SHALL BE APPROVED UPON A FINDING THAT THE MODIFICATION DOES NOT SIGNIFICANTLY ADVERSELY AFFECT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. 5. Old Business: A. Continue discussion on Comprehensive Plan (Low to Medium Density). Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated August 14, 2000, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. On March 6, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to consider the issue of the Low to Medium density land use classification in the Comprehensive Plan with the idea that the City Council would have the sole authority to determine whether a project could be built at the lower R-1 density or the higher R-2 or R-3 density. The Commission considered this issue on June 12, 2000 and after discussion, deferred action on the request and asked staff to provide it with further input. Staff recommended approving the draft language and to direct staffto set a public heating date to consider the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Open discussion: Criego: · Questioned why this issue came about? Kansier gave an example of a past development. · Not sure the new paragraph is effective. · Did not see a need for change. l:\00files\00plcomm\00pcmin\mn081400.doc 7 Planning Commission Minutes ~lugust 15, 2000 · The current paragraph gives the City as much control as it wants. Stamson: · Agreed with Criego. The current wording gives the flexibility. The strength in the original wording is better. The Commissioners did not have a problem. Vonhof: · Concurred with Commissioners. · The Commissioners looked at these issues under the Comprehensive Plan and do more interpretation compared to the Council. · The Council would like specific direction. · From the Commissioners' perspective this is more limiting. Stamson: · The proposed language makes it easier, but not for better decisions. · The end results have been good. Why change it? Criego: · The new paragraph does not give any direction. It should be one way or the other. Vonhof: · A compromise is to add the last sentence of the new paragraph to the old language. Stamson: · The existing language is working well. · Add the last sentence of the new language to the existing paragraph. The Council has the ultimate decision anyway. MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO INITIATE AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ADD "THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY IN MAKING THE DETERMINATION OF HOW THIS CRITERION IS APPLIED IN ANY GIVEN SITUATION" TO THE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION CRITERIA FOR URBAN LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. 6. New Business: 7. Announcements and Correspondence: l:\00files\00plcomm\00pcmin\mn081400.doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2000 The August 28, 2000 meeting has been cancelled. The next meeting will be September 11, 2000. Criego suggested discussing the bluff encroachments with City and DNR and how the Commission allows permits. Kansier said the DNR will speak with staff at the end of the month on this issue. 8. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 8:28 p.m. Donald Rye Director of Planning Connie Carlson Recording Secretary l:\00files\00plcomm\00pcmin\mn081400.doc 9