Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout14.C. Reguide Property, Extend MUSA and Zoning Map Amendment-Ord. No. 667-Res. No. 5889 CITY OF SHAKOPEE I <j. C . Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Reguide Property and Extend MUSA and Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone Property MEETING DATE: May 21,2003 REVIEW PERIOD: March 6 - July 4, 2003 CASELOG NO.: 03-028 INTRODUCTION: Tollefson Development has made application to mnend the Comprehensive Plan to reguide property from Rural Residential to Commercial and High Density Residential; to extend MUSA to the entire site; and to rezone the property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Multiple Fmnily Residential (R3) and Highway Business (B 1) zones. The application submitted requests that 5.9 acres in the northwest comer of the property be reguided commercial and rezoned to Highway Business (B 1) zone and that the remaining area (approximately 31 acres) be reguided High Density Residential and rezoned to Multiple Family Residential (R3) zone. Copies ofthe staff reports to the Planning Commission are attached for the Council's information. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission conducted the public hearing on the subject request at the meeting of April 17th. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Commission voted to table action on the request in order to obtain further information regarding adjacent land uses and traffic estimates and on the type of development being requested by the applicant. At its May 8 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval to the City Council to reguide and rezone the property to Planned Residential District (PRD), subject to Metropolitan Council review and approval, and to extend MUSA to the property. When questioned, the applicant agreed to the PRD reguiding and rezoning, which allows Medium Density Residential (R2), Multiple Fmnily Residential (R3) and Neighborhood Commercial (NC) development with the review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve Resolution No. 5889, A Resolution Reguiding Property to Planned Residential District and extending MUSA. 1 2. Approve Ordinance No. 667, An Ordinance Rezoning Property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Planned Residential District (PRD) zone. 3. Deny Resolution No. 5889 and Ordinance No. 667. 4. Table the matter for further information. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Offer a motion to approve Resolution No. 5889, and move its adoption. 2. Offer a motion to approve Ordinance No. 667 , and move its adoption. , LfJ/LIA- g: \cc\2003\05-20\dreambuilders.doc 2 ORDINANCE NO. 667, FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE APPROVING A REQUEST TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION (AG) TO PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (PRD) WHEREAS, Tollefson Development, Inc., applicant, and Dremn Builders, LLC, property owner have requested the rezoning of property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Highway Business (Bl) and Multiple Fmnily Residential (R3); and WHEREAS, the subj ect property is legally described as; The Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 16, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, notices were duly sent and posted, and a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on April 17, 2003, at which time all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, on May 8,20032, recommended approval of the rezoning of property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Planned Residential District (PRD); and WHEREAS, the City Council heard the matter at its meeting of May 20,2003. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1 - That the zoning map adopted in City Code Sec. 11.03 is hereby mnended by rezoning the property referenced herein, from Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone to Planned Residential District (PRD) Zone contingent upon review and approval by the Metropolitan Council ofthe reguiding ofthe subject property to Planned Residential District. Section 2 - Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. Passed in session ofthe City Council ofthe City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,2003. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest: , Judith S. Cox, City Clerk Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the day of ,2003. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 5889 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE APPROVING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE TO REGUIDE PROPERTY FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO PLANNED RESDIENTIAL DISTRICT AND EXTEND THE METROPOLITAN URBAN SERVICE AREA (MUSA) TO PROPERTY WHEREAS, Tollefson Development, Inc., applicant; and Dream Builders, LLC, property owner, have requested the re-guiding of land from Rural Residential to Commercial and Multiple Fmnily Residential and the extension of MUS A to the property; and WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as: The Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 16, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, notices were duly sent and posted, and a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on April 17, 2003, at which time all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council heard the matter at its meeting of May 20,2003; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shakopee hereby adopts the following findings of facts relative to the above-nmned request; Finding No.1: The 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update is not in error. Finding No.2: Significant changes in community goals and policies have not taken place. Finding No.3: Significant changes in City wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. The realignment of the intersection of CSAH 16 with CSAH 83 and related improvements and utility service extensions, as well as, the proximity of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the request to mnend the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update by re-guiding the subject property from rural residential to planned residential district, contingent upon Metropolitan Council review and approval, and the extension of MUS A to the site is hereby approved. Passed in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of ,2003. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest: , Judith S. Cox, City Clerk 4 *r CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Reguide Property and add MUSA; Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone Property MEETING DATE: April 17, 2003 REVIEW PERIOD: March 6 - July 4, 2003 CASELOG NO.: 03-028 Site Information: Applicant: Tollefson Development Property Owner: Dremn Builders LLC Location: South of CSAH 16 and east of CSAH 83 Adjacent Zoning: North: Highway Business (B 1) South: Agricultural Preservation (AG) East: Agricultural Preservation (AG) West: Agricultural Preservation (AG) MUSA: The site is NOT within the MUSA boundary INTRODUCTION: Tollefson Development has made a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to extend MUSA to the subject site and reguide the land use plan for commercial and high density residential. Tollefson Development has also requested that the zoning map be amended to rezone the property to be consistent with the reguiding request. Specifically, the requests are to 1) amend the Comprehensive Plan guiding of property from Rural Residential to Commercial and High Density Residential; 2) to extend urban services (MUSA) to the property; and 3) to rezone the property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Highway Business (Bl) and Multiple Family Residential (R3). The subject site is located south of CSAH 16 and east of CSAH 83 (see Exhibit A). The property is approximately 36 acres in size. The applicant has requested that 5.9 acres in the northwest comer of the property be reguided and rezoned for commercial development and that the remaining area (30.9 acres) be reguided and rezoned for high density residential development. Please see Exhibit B, the applicant's narrative. 1 DISCUSSION: Shakopee Public Utilities has commented that it may wish to locate one or more municipal wells on the subject property. SPUC noted that it will contact the applicant to discuss. Minnegasco has commented that it has a transmission line easement located in the southwest comer of the property. The City's Comprehensive Plan sets basic policies to guide the development of the City. The purpose of designating different areas for residential, commercial, and industrial land uses is to promote the location of compatible land uses, as well as to prevent incompatible land uses from being located in close proximity to one another. While the City's adopted 1999 Land Use Plan guides the subject property for rural residential use, the recent completion of the project that realigned the intersection of CSAH 16 and CSAH 83, along with the extension of utilities as a part ofthat project and the proximity of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. suggest that the subj ect property is ripe for development. Because of the property's location on 2 county arterials, that suggests that it would be suitable for somewhat higher density uses as proposed by the applicant. With the proposed mixture of uses on the site, staff would envision a plan corning forWard that would use the commercial portion as a neighborhood service and retail component serving the residential portion of the project. In that regard, staff does have some concern that the requested B-1 zoning district may be too broad, as it would allow larger scale commercial uses such as motor vehicle sales lots. For that reason, the Commission may wish to discuss with the applicant whether a classification such a Neighborhood Commercial (N-C) or Community Commercial (C-C) would best serve the contemplated project. FINDINGS: The Zoning Ordinance does not specify criteria for granting a Comprehensive Plan Map amendment. Though reasonable criteria would be Criteria 1-3 for Zoning Ordinance amendments. Staff has provided Criteria 1-3 for the Commission's review and discussion. Criteria #1 That the original Comprehensive Plan is in error; Finding #1 The original Comprehensive Plan is not in error. Criteria #2 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place; Finding # 2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have not taken place. Criteria #3 That significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. Finding #3 Significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. The realignment of the intersection of CSAH 16 with CSAH 83 and related improvements and utility service extensions, as well as the proximity of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. The Zoning Ordinance specifies criteria for granting a Zoning Map Amendment. An amendment may be granted when one or more of the following criteria are met. 2 Criteria #1 That the original zoning ordinance is in error; Finding #1 The original toning ordinance and map are not in error. Criteria #2 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place; Finding #2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have not taken place. Criteria #3 That significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns; Finding #3 Significant changes in citywide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. The realignment of the intersection of CSAH 16 with CSAH 83 and related improvements and utility service extensions, as well as the proximity of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. Criteria #4 That the Comprehensive Plan requires a different provision. Finding #4 The adopted 1999 Comprehensive Plan does not require an amendment to the zoning map consistent with the applicants' request. However, if the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan were granted, the request zoning would be consistent with the amended Comprehensive Plan. As submitted forthe Commission'scol1sidefatiol1, therezoning request would appear to meet criteria no. 4. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to reguide and rezone the subject property, as requested, contingent upon approval from the Metropolitan Council of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the extension of MUS A to the subject site. 2. Recommend denial by the City Council ofthe request to reguide and rezone the subject property as requested and extend MUSA. 3. Continue the public hearing and request additional information from the applicant or staff. 4; Close the public hearing, buttable the matter and request additional information. ACTION REQUESTED: Recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to reguide and rezone the subject property, as requested, contingent upon approval from the Metropolitan Council of the Comprehensive Plan mnendmentand the extension of MUS A to the subject site. ... u1ieKlij~ lanner II g:\boaa-pc\2003\04-17\rgrezdreambuilders.doc 3 - - I - I \ \ \ \ I Bl -i AG RRI BP I \ I L M ('<'l 00 ~ -- en U -- AG ~ \ ~ ~ ::l .0 ~ <:II ..... = ~ [;YH-1BJ-rA - N ~ ..W*E SHAKOPEE COMMUNl1YPRlDESlNCE 1857 S Reguiding & Rezoning o Zoning Boundary ------ Parcel Boundary --...------' _ Parcel Area in Question ~ /'di' I t::>T1 D Civil Engineering John Oliver & AssociatesJ Inc" Land Surveying 201 West Travelers Trail, Suite 210, BurnsviIle, MN 55337 Land Planning (952) 894-3045 . Fax (952) 894-3049 burns@joliverassoc.com Tollefson Development, Inc. Commercial/Residential - Shakopee, Minnesota Co.Rd 16 & Co Rd 83- Project Analysis March 6, 2003 Project Location: The Northwest Quaret of the Northeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 115, Range 22 (Co Rd 16.& Co Rd 83, SE Quadrant) Project size: 36.27 acres net of roads Present zoning: AG Proposed Zoning: R3(approx. 30.3 acres) 81 (approx. 5.9 acres) Project Type: Commercial business and med-high density housing The attached application for rezoning of the present AG property being purchased from Dream Builders, LLC, Shakopee, MN., requests two separate zoning areas being approx. 5,9 acres in the northwest corner of the project for highway business commercial use (B1) and approx. 30.9 acres residue for medium to high density residential (R3) town homes. There have been significant changes recently in the city and neighborhood development patterns with the recent upgrade and improvements to Co. Rd 83 and to Co Rd 16 which also has been relocated to the south of it's original position and now is onthe north line of the subject parcel of land. The land to the north of the subject parcel is presently zoned Highway Business (81), the land totheeasfahd south is Trust Reserve and the land to the west is Mining. Jf1 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Reguide Property and add MUSA; Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone Property MEETING DATE: May 8, 2003 REVIEW PERIOD: March 6 - July 4, 2003 CASELOG NO.: 03-028 Site Information: Applicant: Tollefson Development Property Owner: Dream Builders LLC Location: South of CSAH 16 and east of CSAH 83 Adjacent Zoning: North: Highway Business (B 1) South: Agricultural Preservation (AG) East: Agricultural Preservation (AG) West: Agricultural Preservation (AG) MUSA: The site is NOT within the MUSA boundary INTRODUCTION: Tollefson Development has made a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to extend MUSA to the subject site and reguide the land use plan for commercial and high density residential. Tollefson Development has also requested that the zoning map be amended to rezone the property to be consistent with the reguiding request. Specifically, the requests are to 1) amend the Comprehensive Plan guiding of property from Rural Residential to Commercial and High Density Residential; 2) to extend urban services (MUSA) to the property; and 3) to rezone the property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Highway Business (Bl) and Multiple Family Residential (R3). The subject site is located south ofCSAH 16 and east ofCSAH 83 (see Exhibit A). The property is approximately 36 acres in size. The applicant has requested that 5.9 acres in the northwest comer of the property be reguided and rezoned for commercial development and that the remaining area (30.9 acres) be reguided and rezoned for high density residential development. Please see Exhibit B, the applicant's narrative. 1 DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission reviewed this request at its April 17 meeting. At that time, the Commission closed the public hearing but tabled action on the matter. Specifically, the Commission requested information regarding 1) any changes in the SMSC land use plans for its property; 2) traffic generation and land use patterns for the other 3 quadrants of the intersection; and 3) discussion with the applicant regarding the appropriate zoning for the site. Staff has contacted the SMSC. questioning any land use decisions or proposals on its property but has not yet received a response. The current comprehensive plan does guide the 2 northern quadrants of the intersection for commercial development. The third quadrant is currently used for the gravel pit, however, the reclamation plan for the pit does provide for approximately 40 acres of commercial development in the southwest comer of CSAH 83 and 16. The traffic analysis completed for the City by WSB, Inc. did assume commercial development at all four comers ofCSAH 83 and 16. Staff has spoken with the applicant regarding the appropriate zoning for the site. The applicant has stated that they are willing to discuss a commercial zoning other than Highway Business (B1). The City's Comprehensive Plan sets basic policies to guide the development of the City. The purpose of designating different areas for residential, commercial, and industrial land uses is to promote the location of compatible land uses, as well as to prevent incompatible land uses from being located in close proximity to one another. Please find attached a copy ofthe April 17, 2003 memo for further information. FINDINGS: The Zoning Ordinance does not specify criteria for granting a Comprehensive Plan Map amendment. Though reasonable criteria would be Criteria 1-3 for Zoning Ordinance amendments. Staff has provided Criteria 1-3 for the Commission's review and discussion. Criteria #1 That the original Comprehensive Plan is in error; Finding #1 The original Comprehensive Plan is not in error. Criteria #2 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place; Finding # 2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have not taken place. Criteria #3 That significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. Finding #3 Significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. The realignment of the intersection of CSAH 16 with CSAH 83 and related improvements and utility service extensions, as well as the proximity of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. The Zoning Ordinance specifies criteria for granting a Zoning Map Amendment. An amendment may be granted when one or more ofthe following criteria are met. 2 Criteria #1 That the original zoning ordinance is in error; Finding #1 The original zoning ordinance and map are not in error. Criteria #2 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place; Finding #2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have not taken place. Criteria #3 That significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns; Finding #3 Significant changes in citywide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. The realignment of the intersection of CSAH 16 with CSAH 83 and related improvements and utility service extensions, as well as the proximity of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. Criteria #4 That the Comprehensive Plan requires a different provision. Finding #4 The adopted 1999 Comprehensive Plan does not require an amendment to the zoning map consistent with the applicants' request. However, if the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan were granted, the request zoning would be consistent with the amended Comprehensive Plan. As submitted for the Commission's consideration, the rezoning request would appear to meet criteria no. 4. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to reguide and rezone the subject property, as requested, contingent upon approval from the Metropolitan Council of the Comprehensive Plan mnendment and the extension of MUS A to the subject site. 2. Recommend denial by the City Council of the request to reguide and rezone the subject property as requested and extend MUSA. 3. Continue the public hearing and request additional information from the applicant or staff. 4. Close the public hearing, but table the matter and request additional information. ACTION REQUESTED: Recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to reguide and rezone the subject property, as requested, contingent upon approval from the Metropolitan Council of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the extension of MUS A to the subject site. ~~~ ulie Klima Planner n g: \boaa - pc \200 3 \0 5-08\rgrezdreambuildersrev. doc 3 *r CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Reguide Property and add MUSA; Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone PropeIiy MEETING DATE: April 17, 2003 REVIEW PERIOD: March 6 - July 4,2003 CASELOG NO.: 03-028 Site Information: Applicant: Tollefson Development Property Owner: Dream Builders LLC Location: South of CSAH 16 and east of CSAH 83 Adj acent Zoning: North: Highway Business (B 1) South: Agricultural Preservation (AG) East: Agdcultural Preservation (AG) West: Aglicultural Preservation (AG) MUS A: The site is NOT within the MUSA boundary INTRODUCTION: Tollefson Development has made a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to extend MUSA to the subject site and reguide the land use plan for commercial and high density residential. Tollefson Development has also requested that the zoning map be amended to rezone the property to be consistent with the reguiding request. Specifically, the requests are to 1) amend the Comprehensive Plan guiding of property from Rural Residential to Commercial and High Density Residential; 2) to extend urban services (MUSA) to the property; and 3) to rezone the property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Highway Business (Bl) and Multiple Family Residential (R3). The subject site is located south ofCSAH 16 and east ofCSAH 83 (see Exhibit A). The property is approximately 36 acres in size. The applicant has requested that 5.9 acres in the northwest comer of the property be reguided and rezoned for commercial development and that the remaining area (30.9 acres) be reguided and rezoned for high density residential development. Please see Exhibit B, the applicant's narrative. 1 DISCUSSION: Shakopee Public Utilities has commented that it may wish to locate one or more municipal wells on the subject property. SPUC noted that it will contact the applicant to discuss. Minnegasco has commented that it has a transmission line easement located in the southwest corner of the property. The City's Comprehensive Plan sets basic policies to guide the development of the City. The purpose of designating different areas for residential, commercial, and industrial land uses is to promote the location of compatible land uses, as well as to prevent incompatible land uses from being located in close proximity to one another. While the City's adopted 1999 Land Use Plan guides the subject property for rural residential use, the recent completion of the project that realigned the intersection of CSAH 16 and CSAH 83, along with the extension of utilities as a part of that project and the proximity of the Valley Green Corporate Center site suggest that the subject property is ripe for development. Because of the property's location on 2 county arterials, that suggests that it would be suitable for somewhat higher density uses as proposed by the applicant. With the proposed mixture of uses on the site, staff would envision a plml coming forward that would use the commercial portion as a neighborhood service and retail component serving the residential portion of the project. In that regard, staff does have some concern that the requested B-1 zoning district may be too broad, as it would allow larger scale commercial uses such as motor vehicle sales lots. For that reason, the Commission may wish to discuss with the applicant whether a classification such a Neighborhood Commercial (N-C) or Community Commercial (C-C) would best serve the contemplated project. FINDINGS: The Zoning Ordinance does not specify criteria for granting a Comprehensive Plan Map amendment. Though reasonable criteria would be Criteria 1-3 for Zoning Ordinance amendments. Staff has provided Criteria 1-3 for the Commission's review and discussion. Criteria #1 That the original Comprehensive Plan is in error; Finding #1 The original Cornprehensive Plan is not in error. Criteria #2 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place; Finding # 2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have not taken place. Criteria #3 That significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. Finding #3 Significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. The realignment of the intersection of CSAH 16 with CSAH 83 and related improvements and utility service extensions, as well as the proximity of the Valley Green COlporate Center site. The Zoning Ordinance specifies criteria for granting a Zoning Map Amendment. An amendment may be granted when one or more of the following criteria are met. 2 Criteria #1 That the original zoning ordinance is in error; Finding #1 The original zoning ordinance and map are not in error. Criteria #2 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place; Finding #2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have not taken place. Criteria #3 That significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns; Finding #3 Significant changes in citywide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. The realignment of the intersection of CSAH 16 with CSAH 83 and related improvements and utility service extensions, as well as the proximity of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. Criteria #4 That the Comprehensive Plan requires a different provision. Finding #4 The adopted 1999 Comprehensive Plan does not require an amendment to the zoning map consistent with the applicants' request. However, if the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan were granted, the request zoning would be consistent with the amended Comprehensive Plan. As submitted fortheCommission's consideration, the rezoning request would appear to meet criteria no. 4. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to reguide and rezone the subject property, as requested, contingent upon approval from the Metropolitan Council of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the extension of MUS A to the subject site. 2. Recommend denial by the City Council ofthe request to reguide and rezone the subject property as requested and extend MUSA. 3. Continue the public hearing and request additional infonnation from the applicant or staff. 4. Close the public hearing, but table the matter and request additional information. ACTION REQUESTED: Recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to reguide and rezone the subject property, as requested, contingent upon approval from the Metropolitan Council ofthe Comprehensive Plan amendment and the extension of MUS A to the subject site. ..... UlieKlim!~ lanner II g:\boaa-pc\2003\04-17\rgrezdreambuiJders.doc 3 I - - l I - lb- M 00 ~ 1-- rJJ U -- ~ AG \ >> ~ ::l ..a ~ Q) - t:l ~ [YH-/BrrA N ~ w*, SHAKOPEE COMMUNTril'RlDESlNCE IIlS1 S Reguiding & Rezoning o Zoning Boundary ------ Parcel Boundary ------- _ Parcel Area in Question ~(V"' I D/I 1-/ Civil Engineering John Oliver & Associates, Inc. Land Surveying 201 West Travelers Trail, Suite 210, Burnsville, MN 55337 Land Planning (952) 894-3045 . Fax (952) 894-3049 b urns@joliverassoc.com Tollefson Development, Inc. Commercial/Residential - Shakopee, Minnesota Co.Rd 16 & Co Rd 83 ~ Project Analysis March 6,2003 Project Location: The Northwest Quaret of the Northeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 115, Range 22 (Co Rd 16 & Co Rd 83, SE Quadrant) Project size: 36.27 acres net of roads Present zoning: AG Proposed Zoning: R3 (approx. 30.3 acres) 81 (approx. 5.9 acres) Project Type: Commercial business and med-high density housing The attached application for rezoning of the present AG property being purchased from Dream Builders, LLC, Shakopee, MN., requeststwo separate zoning areas being approx. 5,9 acres in the northwest corner of the project for highway business commercial use (81) and approx. 30.9 acres residue for medium to high density residential (R3) town homes. There have been significant changes recently in the city and neighborhood development patterns with the recent upgrade and improvements to Co. Rd 83 and to Co Rd 16 which also has been relocated to the south of it's original position and now is on the north line of the subject parcel of land. The land to the north of the subject parcel is presently zoned Highway Business (B1), the land to the east and south is Trust Reserve and the land to the west is Mining.