HomeMy WebLinkAbout14.D. Comp Plan Amendment To Guide Property and Zoning Map Amendment to Zone Property-Res. No. 6054-Ord. No. 705
/t.f.o,
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
CASE NO.: 04-029
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Guide Property and Zoning Map
Amendment to Zone Property
MEETING DATE: May 18, 2004
REVIEW PERIOD: March 16 - July 14, 2004
INTRODUCTION
Curt Kallio, on behalf of the property owners within Beckrich Park Estates has submitted an
application for amending the comprehensive plan to reguide property and extend MUS A, as well
as, amending the zoning map to rezone property. The requests are to reguide the entire Beckrich
Park Estates development :from rural residential to. single family residential, to extend MUSA to
the entire development area, and to rezone the development from Rural Residential (RR) to
Urban Residential (R-IB).
Beckrich Park Estates is located north of County Road 78 and east of County Road 79 (please see
Exhibit A). The application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meetings on April
22 and May 6, 2004. A copy of the May 6 Planning Commission report is attached for the
Council's information.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Adopt Resolution No. 6054, a Resolution Approving the reguiding and extension of MUS A
for a portion of Beckrich Park Estates and Denying the reguiding, extension of MUSA, and
rezoning for the remainder ofBeckrich Park Estates.
2. Adopt Ordinance No. 705, an Ordinance of the City of Shakopee approving the request to
rezone property :from Rural Residential (RR) to Urban Residential (R-IB).
3. Direct staff to prepare alternative resolutions for consideration by the City Council.
4. Table the matter and request additional information.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission reviewed the request at its meeting of May 6, 2004, and
recommended approval of the request to reguide, extend MUS A, and rezone the 1.27 acres
intended to be incorporated into the proposed Valley Creek Crossings plat. The Commission
further recommended denial of the request to reguide, extend MUS A, and rezone the remaining
acreage in Beckrich Park Estates.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. Offer and approve a motion to adopt Resolution No. 6054, a Resolution Approving the
reguiding and extension of MUSA for a portion of Beckrich Park Estates and Denying the
reguiding, extension of MUS A, and rezoning for a portion of Beckrich Park Estates.
2. Offer and approve a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 705, an Ordinance of the City of
Shakopee approving the request to rezone property from Rural Residential (RR) to Urban
Residential (R-IB) for a portion of Beckrich Park Estates.
1!lii ~j~h1' 'JL--
J ie Klima
anner II
g: \cc\2004 \05-18\compplanbeckpark.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 6054
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE APPROVING A REQUEST TO
AMEND THE 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO GUIDE CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDNETIAL AND TO EXTEND THE MUSA BOUNDARY AND
DENYING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
TO GUIDE CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND
EXTEND MUSA TO THE PROPERTY AND TO ZONE PROPERTY TO URBAN
RESIDENTIAL (R-IB)
WHEREAS, Curt Kallio, applicant, and the Homeowners Association of Beckrich Park
Estates, property owners, have requested the reguiding of property to single family residential,
the extension of MUS A and the rezoning of property to Urban Residential (R-IB); and
WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as:
The Plat of Beckrich Park Estates, Scott County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, notices were duly sent and posted, and a public hearing was held before the
Planning Commission on April 22 and May 6, 2004, at which time all persons present were given
an opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council heard the matter at its meeting on May 18, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the extension of
MUSA and reguiding from Rural Residential to Single Family Residential for property legally
described as:
That part of Outlot D, Beckrich Park Estates, Scott County, Minnesota, described as
follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said outlot; thence South 00 degrees 11 minutes 23
seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said outlot 419. 97feet; thence North 36
degrees 21 minutes 23 seconds West 161.67 feet; thence North 34 degrees 22 minutes 55 seconds
West 87.77 feet; thence North 26 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds West 120.78 feet; thence North
05 degrees 41 minutes 33 seconds West 107.67 feet to the north line of said outlot; thence
easterly along the north line of said outlot to the point of beginning; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request for the
extension ofMSUA,reguiding from Rural Residential to Single Family Residential, and
rezoning from Rural Residential (RR) Zone to Urban Residential (R-IB) for the remainder ofthe
property within the Beckrich Park Estates plat.
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-named request for
property legally described as: That part of Outlot D, Beckrich Park Estates, Scott County,
Minnesota, described asfollows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said outlot; thence South
00 degrees 11 minutes 23 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said outlot
419.97 feet; thence North 36 degrees 21 minutes 23 seconds West 161.67 feet; thence North 34
degrees 22 minutes 55 seconds West 87.77 feet; thence North 26 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds
West 120. 78 feet; thence North 05 degrees 41 minutes 33 seconds West 107.67 feet to the north
line of said outlot; thence easterly along the north line of said outlot to the point of beginning;
Comprehensive Plan
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. The extension of municipal services to developing areas,
when feasible, is a desirable development pattern for the City.
Finding No. 3: Significant changes in City wide or neighborhood development
patterns have occurred in that single family residential development
and the opportunity to provide municipal services to developable
properties do now exist in this area of the City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the request to amend the 1999 Comprehensive
Plan Update for reguiding from rural residential to single family residential and the extension of
MUSA, for property legally described as: That part of Outlot D, Beckrich Park Estates, Scott
County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said outlot;
thence South 00 degrees 11 minutes 23 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of
said outlot 419. 97feet; thence North 36 degrees 21 minutes 23 seconds West 161.67 feet; thence
North 34 degrees 22 minutes 55 seconds West 87. 77 feet; thence North 26 degrees 05 minutes 19
seconds West 120. 78feet; thence North 05 degrees 41 minutes 33 seconds West 107.67 feet to
the north line of said outlot; thence easterly along the north line of said outlot to the point of
beginning; is hereby APPROVED contingent upon approval from the Metropolitan Council.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City
of Shakopee hereby adopts the following findings of facts relative to the above-named request for
property legally described as: The plat of Beckrich Park Estates, Scott County, Minnesota, except:
That part of Outlot D, Beckrich Park Estates, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Beginning at the northeast corner of said outlot; thence South 00 degrees 11 minutes 23 seconds
West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said outlot 419.97 feet,' thence North 36 degrees 21
minutes 23 seconds West 161.67 feet; thence North 34 degrees 22 minutes 55 seconds West 87.77
feet; thence North 26 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds West 120.78feet; thence North 05 degrees 41
minutes 33 seconds West 107.67 feet to the north line of said outlot; thence easterly along the north
line of said outlot to the point of beginning;
Comprehensive Plan
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. The City has not experienced a change in policy relating to
the extension of municipal services to existing rural developments or
additional development to those platted areas.
Finding No.3: Significant changes in City wide or neighborhood development
patterns have not occurred in existing rural developed areas.
Zoning Map
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 that would require or suggest that the subject property be re-
zoned as requested.
Finding No.3: Significant changes in City wide or neighborhood development
patterns have not occurred in existing rural developed areas.
Finding No.4: The Comprehensive Plan does not require a different provision.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the request to amend the 1999 Comprehensive
Plan Update for reguiding from rural residential to single family residential, the extension of
MUS A, and rezoning from Rural Residential (RR) zone to Urban Residential (R-IB) zone for
property legally described as: The plat of Beckrich Park Estates, Scott County, Minnesota,
except: That part of Outlot D, Beckrich Park Estates, Scott County, Minnesota, described as
follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said outlot; thence South 00 degrees 11 minutes 23
seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said outlot 419.97 feet; thence North 36
degrees 21 minutes 23 seconds West 161.67 feet; thence North 34 degrees 22 minutes 55 seconds
West 87. 77 feet; thence North 26 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds West 120.78 feet; thence North
05 degrees 41 minutes 33 seconds West 107.67 feet to the north line of said outlot; thence
easterly along the north line of said outlot to the point of beginning; is hereby DENIED.
Passed in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shako pee, Minnesota held this
day of ,2004.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Attest: ,
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO. 705, FOURTH SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP ADOPTED IN CITY CODE SEC. 11.03 BY
REZONING LAND GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CARRIAGE CIRCLE AND
EAST OF BARRINGTON DRIVE FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RR) TO URBAN
RESIDENTIAL (R-1B) ZONE
WHEREAS, Curt Kallio, applicant and the Homeowners Association of Beckrich Park
Estates, property owners, have requested the rezoning of land from Rural Residential (RR) to
Urban Residential (R-IB) Zone; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as:
That part of Outlot D, Beckrich Park Estates, Scott County, Minnesota, described as
follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said outlot; thence South 00 degrees 11 minutes 23
seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said outlot 419. 97feet; thence North 36
degrees 21 minutes 23 seconds West 161.67 feet; thence North 34 degrees 22 minutes 55 seconds
West 87. 77 feet; thence North 26 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds West 120. 78feet; thence North
05 degrees 41 minutes 33 seconds West 107.67 feet to the north line of said outlot; thence
easterly along the north line of said outlot to the point of beginning; and
WHEREAS, notices were duly sent and posted, and a public hearing was held before the
Planning Commission on April 22 and May 6, 2004, at which time all persons present were given
an opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, on May 6, 2004, recommended approval of the
rezoning request; and
WHEREAS, the City Council heard the matter at its meeting of May 18, 2004, and found
that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the area of the City
within which it is located.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1: That the following findings of fact are hereby' adopted relative to the
requested rezoning;
Finding #1 The original zoning ordinance is not in error.
Finding #2 The applicant is proposing a development that will be consistent with the approved
Comprehensive Plan.
Finding #3 Significant changes in development patterns have not occurred. Zoning this parcel
to Urban Residential (R-IB) is consistent with the developmentpatterns
contemplated with the approved Comprehensive Plan.
Finding #4 The requested zoning will be consistent with the approved Comprehensive Plan
land use map.
Section 2 - That the zoning map adopted in City Code Sec. 11.03 is hereby amended by
rezoning the property referenced herein, from Rural Residential (RR) Zone to Urban Residential
(R-IB) Zone contingent upon approval of the Comprehensive .Plan amendment from the
Metropolitan Council.
Section 2 - Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage
and publication.
Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota held this day of ,2004.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Attest: ,
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the day of , 2004.
*1
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Mem o rail dum
TO: Shakopee Planning Commission
FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Guide Property and Zoning Map
Amendment to Zone Property
MEETING DATE: May 6, 2004
REVIEW PERIOD: March 16 - July 14,2004
CASELOG NO.: 04-029
Site Information:
Applicant: Curt Kallio on behalf of Beckrich Park Estates Property Owners
Property Owner: See Attached
Location: North of CR 78 and west of CR 79
Adjacent Zoning: North: Rural Residential(RR)/Urban Residential (R-IB)
South: Rural Residential (RR)/Agriculfural (AG)
East: Urban Residential (R-IB)
West: Jackson Township
MUSA: The site is NOT within the MUSA boundary
DISCUSSION:
Curt Kallio, on behalf of the property owners within Beckrich Park Estates, has made a request to
reguide and rezone property, and to extend the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUS A)
boundary to include the Beckrich Park Estates development. Specifically, the requests are to:
1. amend the Comprehensive Plan to reguide property from rural residential to single family
residential;
2. to rezone the property from Rural Residential (RR) to Urban Residential (R-IB); and
3. to extend MUSA to be able to serve Beckrich Park Estates with urban services.
The subject site is located at the northeast corner of County Road 78 and County Road 79.
Please see Exhibits A and B for location and details. The Beckrich Park Estates development is
approximately 74 acres in size.
The property owners within Beckrich Park Estates are requesting the reguiding, rezoning and
extension of services in order to be able to sell off a portion of the open space within their
development. The land located directly east ofBeckrich Park Estates (formerly part of the
Marschall Farm) is the subject of an application with the City requesting preliminary plat
1
approval. Attached as Exhibit C is a copy of that preliminary plat. The preliminary plat
application does include some ofthe property currently designated as open space within the
Beckrich Park Estates Planned Unit Development (PUD). The preliminary plat application
depicts the area currently designated as open space in Beckrich Park Estates as a road connection
and additional single family residential lots to be served by municipal services. The area
proposed for inclusion in the preliminary plat is approximately 1.27 acres in size.
Staffhas contacted the Metropolitan Council to inquire about the impact of extension of the MUSA
to Beckrich Park Estates on the City's MUSA allocation. With the approval of the current land use
plan, the Metropolitan Council approved a 2186 acre MUSA allocation to the City. Approximately
1660 acres of that allocation remains available. The Metropolitan Council has informed staff that
any extension of MUS A boundary (whether serving existing developments or new developments)
would be deducted from the City's allocation.
IfMUSA were extended to serve Beckrich Park Estates, Hillwood Estates (the development
directly north ofBeckrich Park) would be sandwiched between developments with urban services.
In addition, staffhas reason to believe that other rural residential plats may be interested in
obtaining urban services.
Staffviews this application as having two separate issues. One is the mechanism to allow a portion
of Beckrich Park's open space to be included with the proposed Valley Creek Crossing. The
second issue is the request to rezone and extend MUSA to the existing Beckrich Park Estates.
After consulting with the City Attorney, staffhas been advised that the transaction of the open
space area to be included with Valley Creek Crossing can be accomplished through the Final Plat of
Valley Creek Crossing. As a part of that development, the open space area to be sold would have to
be reguided for single family residential development, rezoned to an appropriate zone, and MUSA
extended to it. As a follow up, the Planning Commission would need to adopt a resolution
amending the Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Beckrich Park Estates memorializing the
change in open space.
Based on the determination of Met Council that the use of MUSA allocation for existing
developments, staff does not believe that extension of services to existing developments is an
appropriate use of MUS A allocation at this time. Staff feels this issue is of a magnitude that
requires further review and research to determine alternatives to address zoning and extension of
services to existing, unsewered developments.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission offer a motion to recommend approval to the
City Council of the reguiding of property from Rural Residential to Single Family Residential,
the extension of MUS A, and the rezoning from Rural Residential (RR) to Urban Residential (R-
IB) Zone for the property proposed for inclusion in the proposed Valley Creek Crossing
development and direct staff to bring back a resolution to address the amendment to the PUD of
Beckrich Park Estates.
Additionally, staff recommends that the Planning Commission offer a motion to recommend
denial of the request to reguide, extend MUSA, and rezone the remainder of Beckrich Park
2
Estates at this time and direct staff to research the issue of extension of services and zoning
classifications for existing rural residential developments.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval to the City Council of the reguiding~ rezoning and extension of
MUSA to Beckrich Park Estates, contingent upon approval from the Metropolitan Council
of the guiding change.
2. Recommend approval to the City Council of the reguiding, rezoning and extension of
MUSA to a PORTION ofBeckrich Park Estates, contingent upon the approval from the
Metropolitan Council.
3. Recommend denial to the City Council of the reguiding, rezoning, and extension of MUS A
to Beckrich Park Estates.
4. Continue the public hearing to allow staff additional time to research issues.
5. Direct staff to prepare a resolution to address the amendment to the PUD of Beckrich Park
Estates.
6. Continue the public hearing to another date to allow staff additional time to research issues.
7. Close the public hearing, but table the matter and request additional information.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer and approve the following motions:
1. To recommend approval to the City Council of the reguiding of property from Rural
Residential to Single Family Residential, the extension of MUSA, and.the rezoning from
Rural Residential (RR) to Urban Residential (R-IB) Zone for the property proposed for
inclusion in the proposed Valley Creek Crossing development and direct staff to bring
back a resolution to address the amendment to the PUD ofBeckrich Park Estates.
2. To offer a motion to recommend denial to the City Council of the request to reguide,
extend MUS A, and rezone the remainder of Beckrich Park Estates at this time and direct
staff to research the issue of extension of services and zoning classifications for existing
rural residential developments.
Julie Klima
Planner IT
g: \boaa -pc \2004\05-06\compplanbeckrichpark.doc
3
AG
--.
~ N
W*E
SHAKOPEE
COMM1JNIl'{PR!DESlNCE 1851
Rezoning Rural Residential (RR) to s
Urban Residential (RIB) Zone.
_ Subject Property
..... BoundaryJine.shp
.-..
._.---.l Jacparcels
c::::J Zoning Boundary
.~_':- Parcel Boundary
I "/ I I \\\ \ I I ' I ", ..........-; r-. I.. \ I
/1 HILL'NOOD ESTATES I w ~ I I 'I I --- '
I :~ I J I I '\.}
OUTLOT B --l- -- I I I / /---- I, I'
'. '. :>: CJI,I PRa>DlnES llC ~ --.I I I (I j , ,
,- 2.9\7 133 Sf W, StE. 2. () ---- '\. \
bJ D:: 271GOOOIO --f----'-- \--.-. '\. I
.J .< 1
.J .c \ '-< - --- 'f'
e? n.
,oJ
1 I I \ / "I
\ I \ / .......'1 /
<. AC \SECONO J \ 1---_ / II
() --
,. -
.J D:: 1
.J ")
,.J OUTLOT D
2
211600390 \
~ \
.. D:: S
'oj .c '\ S \
.. n. \
(? ~ ,
.
/
.,.
0- 1 /
.-..
c:i Cl
.. IJJ
.. l\EOOoIAH. BIll " SUt
2 3 ~03 CAARtACE OR
271650250
() 4
.c
() S
D::
1
.' 7 6
~-
JOOS, lfllI\Y ". OEE: -
.. 886 CAARtACE OR :J:
:) OUTLOT C 271050200
~-
()
0 271650380
8 Cl -
1 Cl
BECKRICH PARK ESTATES .(
OIacSOH. CRHG
H~ co RD 7.
LANDOWNER EXHIBIT 271e0200
/
-
,.. ^ ., .... ~ v R ^ " f"'\ .. " -; a
.., v V 1'1 I . V " .... I" v.
--- ~
S TeN EaR 0 C K E S TON EaR 0 eKE
FIR S 1" T H IRe
~W
~
\'\ t-,,"- /' -\- "- \ / 1 /i
: '\ Ir '\. Y \ KALLIO
8 ~ ~ _ . -.... ~ ~, ~~ 'lo . ~ . .. r: Engineering, LLC
I,'\. '\. \ APR Z 8 . :OU~ .,." ',:':"';;
~ I \ II '\. \. . --L I........ Shakopee, MN
~ I '"--- / (") 55379
[!; I PlD Z716S0:!90 _ --I P
~ 1.\ II ~_ _ _ _ -... el 1Y1Y1Y.kallioenglneering.com
I I I C':( C' r' I{' C> I r.,. L! ''0. ^ C> V :....:!! '"
" L \,J r \ I \ I >JJ I I I ,r\ I \ r \ .e \;~~ g
'...... ~~"C' lb ~
............~::I O:S d
_ &.~~o z
I ~E::; ci
c>,o.5! Q ~
I VICINITY MAP i::5 u :l
I .!l f'g:S ;2
oCoO'b
:eg-g -;
~ ZONING INFORMATION ,g 0.'0; ::0 ~
11). ~~"E ki F=
:; EXISTING ZONING = RIB :: ,. 1:.J!. g5
:;1 MINIMUM LOT ~0'lH = 60 FEET ~ (5 il 5'1; (j
_I MINIMUM LOT DEP'lH = 100 FEET '" ~ t; II
fill MINIMUM LOT AREA = 6000 SQ. FT. '2 ~ 1: g ~ ..
"' ~ u'" 5'" I!!
151 ~ H'Ji!'O C5
:;. LOT INFORMATION
~ ~ PROPOSED LOTS = 100
~ j: OUllOTS = 5
I;; l!s I I I GROSS AREA = 47.29
~ "'1 c:; GROSS MEA OF OUllOTS = 1.62 ACRES
~ cO PROPOSED R.O.W. = 11.00 ACRES
: II : PROPOSED PARK = 2.58 ACRES ~
l!s . ~ SElBACK INFORMA110N .~
~ ~ ('\of en
:l 11l "l FRONT = 30 FEET ~ :::ig:
;5 z ::t: SIDE YMD = 10 FEET U ~ c:l
~ I .., SIDE YARD (CORNER) = 20 FEET "0 ~ 'n
l'J I I REAR YMO = 30 FEET EXCEPT SHOIIN O'lHER\\1SE ~ i ~ ;;;
tV' .~ ~ i:A
SIn:: INFORMATlON ,:..: ~ ~ E~
zen...... ::I ("I
MINIMUM LOT ~D'lH AT SE'lBACK UNE IN SUBDIVISION = 60 FEET ~ -< ~ c;:j ~
MINIMUM LOT OEP'lH IN SUBDIVISION = 128 FEET l>
LEGAl DESCRIPTION
Outlot A, "ACC SECOND AODI11ON", Scott County, Minnesota.
and also, ~ .Ff
The Southwe.t Quarter of the Southea.t Quarter of Section 18, Township 115, Ronge 22, Scatt (:l.., ~ _
County, Minnesota, except the South 911.61 fee of the East 512.53 feet. ,:.: :>. 6 ~
<..>.... .
g Qnd~~ ~ ~ ~l
8 I ~ .- r..J 0
;; That part of OUTLOT D. 8ECKRI0l PARK ESTATES, Scott County, Minnesota, de.crlbed as a. 8 U ~
~ I SOUTH 911.61. FEET follows: old :.= >. ~
~ I I Beginning at the northeo.t comer of soid outlot; thence South 00 degree. 11 minute. 23 ~ ~ ,g
I seconds We.t, o..umed bearing. along the easl line of said outlot 419.97 fee~ thence North F 0.. .::'
36 degrees 21 minutes 23 second. We.t 161.67 feet; thence North 34 degree. 22 minutes 55 ... ,..,
I I I second. We.t 87.77 feet: thence North 26 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds We.t 120.78 feet; t:l
I I thence North 05 degrees 41 minutes 33 seconds We.t 107.67 feet to the north line of said ili
: II I oullot: thence easterly along the north line of said oullat to the point of beginning. 1ii G
I t:" \I ,... ,.... 0 T I r\ hol t;
I I PID 779180100 ...." v Co. I I v , , ~ DRAINAGE AND U.TlUTY EASEMENTS
I ~ -~~
I, I ~ .~ PI SOO:22'Z~ I 0 DENOTES IRON MONUMENT TO BE SET
I I ~ HAMPSHIRE 5 1 · DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND
I I I is 0 0
I I \ ~N I - 5 I l!!
1 I I. u \ ~:: - .-J L - 9
III t " ,-RIGHT OF WAY AS PER DOC. NO. 295686 9 ~ :::l ~ ~ ~
I " ' ~ 00 BEING 5 FEET IN \\10'lH AND ADJOINING 1:: ~
. I I t ~-E'LY RIGHT Cf WAY AS PER DO. NO. Z171lS6 0 _,s. _ _ _ LOT UNES. AND 10 FEET IN \\1D'lH AND 0 100 200 0: '"
~I ""- __ _ _.' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ''is SOD,S48"E ADJOINING RIGHT OF WAY UNES AS .
I I ~'COOlJlUNE Cf CD. RO. NO. IT PER DO. NO. 217856 T lil 60.00 SHOl'tN ON lHlS PLAT. SCALE IN FEET l:!
: 1 ~ " - = 8EAR'",S ARE ASSlIM,". ~
L lliEEASTUHECfTHESW'/4CfTHESEI/4CfSEC.IB,T,"5,R.ZZ.J CO. RD. NO. 17_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - ~ 0
I I --- -----------~-----(MARSfHAlL-ROAD) t ~-
. I PlD 279\6(09) Vi 0 <..> ~
I PIC Z7oa2DOIO I PlD Z708ZDOZO I ~ := a 0
~ Ol'tNERIDFYELOPER u 0:
'" a.
KA!.lJO ENGINEERING, LLC ASSOCIATED CAPITAL CORPORATION
124<1 E. 3RO AVE. 327 S. MARSOlALL RD. SHEET
SUITE 103 SUITE 225
SHAKOPEE. MN 55379 SHAKOPEE. MN 55379 1
CONTACT: CURT KA!.lJO. P.E. CONTACT: DftJ.f DAHLKE, V.P. OF
952-445-7354 952-445-2099 1
SHEETS
- - CXffI13/T D
. , r..
.:.:,..~~-...
"
OBJECTION TO REZONING PROPOSAL
-
. To: John Schmitt, Joseph Helkamp, Terry Joos, Steve Menden, Matt Lehman, Ryan
Magin, Larry Meilleur, Steve Clay, Deb Amundson, Gayl Madigan, Mary
Romansky, Michael Willard and Julie Klima
In early April we were given notice that the Shakopee Planning Commission will be
meeting to consider application by Beckrich Park Estates for the amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan and for the rezoning of property. The comprehensive plan
amendments propose the reguiding of property from rural residential to single family
residential and the extension of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area boundary (MUSA).
The rezoning proposes a change from Rural Residential (RR) to Urban Residential (Rl B)
for all of Beckrich Park Estates including property on Barrington Drive, Can"iage Circle,
Cortland Circle and Hampton Circle.
As a life-long resident of Shako pee and, more importantly, of nearby Hillwood Estates,
this proposal concerns us significantly. When Beckrich Park Estates was zoned Rural
Residential (RR) as a planned unit development, it was required there be an average of
2.5-acres per household including the open spaces. Moreover, there was a similar 2.5-
acre requirement for the adjacent Hillwood Estates development. Allowing there to be
five houses per acre in between and in the midst ofth~se 2.5-acre plots would be morally
irresponsible, beyond comprehension and not very prudent, especially given the original
intent of the 2.5-acre land owners and the vast amount of high density housing already in
Shakopee. Furthermore, if the proposed rezoning for Beckrich Park Estates would be
allowed. property owners would he ahle to snhc1ivic1e their existing 2.5-ncre lots nnd huild
an additionaL 11.5 houses on the origi.nal 2.5-acrc lot. Although this is sUlll~what
unrealistic, adding even one additional hO\.1Re on these lots would ~ compktely
di:-;hcarh,miug, as it would deslroy the originul illlCllllOIl~i (lIthe JCVdllplllclIt alld tile
reason a majority of the owners purchased the land to begin with.; space. Therefore, we
feel this property should not be rezoned and/or reclassitied as Rl B.
Even if the rezoning would be allowed at the RIA level, property owners would still be
able to subdivide their property into three houses per acre. This clearly would go against
the character and the original intention of the development. We do not object to Beckrich
Park Estate being included in the MUSA boundary, but we do object to how the rezoning
would negatively affect the area.
We realize that every town needs an appropriate balance of high/low density housing, but
it seems like over the past several years Shakopee has allowed a .significant amqunt of
high-density housing. However, we were sincerely encouraged as we listened to the
controlled growth proclamations of those recently elected.
It is our opinion that a new zoning classification should be created for areas that are RR '
but are being added to the MUSA boundary. As Shakopee continues to grow, there wiU
be nwnerous similar scenarios where rezoning will be required to convert existing rural
water and septic systems to city water and septic systems. As such and sin1ilar to other
cities, Shakopee should have a rezoning classification to be solely utilized to facilitate the
cOI1version from rural water and septic to city water and septic.
As such, we would be extremely appreciative ifyolL could ensure that the properties of
Beckrich Park retain their current RR classification acre requirements, therefore,
preserving the area's integrity, character and original intent.
Thank you,
~
a--- '- ---
, , ~./ :-::... -q,
Robert . Stark
,......
I , 'k'--0
Ic-\~1 01 ~'::ll.'v ...
Wendy M."stark (/ .' C.
-
._ eXIf'IB/l e-
Jj $r~c '
"!i!1., '{r,.
, m If'"
oe:..:,:., V.""t~
., 1;,'9 .
~. /11"'1'
OBJECTION TO REZONING PROPOSAL ,,"i/.'/(,2 .9 ""
, {li(M
,
To: John Schmitt, Joseph Helkamp, Terry Joos, Steve Menden, Matt Lehrnan, Ryan
Magin, Larry Meilleur, Steve Clay, Deb Amundson, Gayl Madigan, Mary
Romansky, Michael Willard and Julie Klima
Around the first week in April, we received a notice of public hearing in the mail for the
Shakopee Planning Commission to meet and consider an application by Beckrich Park
Estates for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and for the rezoning of property.
The comprehensive plan amendments propose the reguiding ofproperty from rural
residential to single family residential and the extension of the Metropolitan Urban
Service Area (MUSA) boundary. The rezoning proposes a change from Rural
Residential (RR) to Urban Residential (RIB) for all ofBeckrich Park Estates.
This recent request for Beckrich Park Estates to rezone from Rural Residential to Urban
Residential (RIB) causes concern for the people living in the Hillwood Estates area.
Prom what we have been able to find out, the reason for this rezoning is for the desire of
Beckrich Park Estates to become connected to city water and sewer. A confusing point is
that a five-acre parcel of land, not owned by Beckrich Park Estates, but another
individual, is also included in this rezoning. The concern is that by rezoning, this would
allow the owner of the five-acre parcel to subdivide the land and build multiple homes
(up to 25 homes per the proposed zoning classification) on the property. This would also
allow the landowners in Beckrich Park Estates to subdivide their lots and allow even
more homes in the area. Allowing this to happen in an area that has primarily 2.5 acres
per parcel does not make practical sense and would go against the initial intentions ofthe
people living in the area. I don't believe it is the intention ofthe people of Beckrich Park
Estates to subdivide their properties, but circumstances change and this could very well
happen in the future.
The people in the Hillwood Estates area moved and built here because ofthe bigger lot
sizes, more open space and more privacy is provides. With the rapid growth of Shakopee
and rapid increase in high density housing already taking place just to the north of
Hillwood Estates, as well as multiple other areas of the city, we have a deep concem that
we will loose this open space and privacy we once had if the rezoning is allowed to take
place. We fully expected that at some point in the future someone would build homes on
the five acre parcel just to the south of Hill wood Estates, but we would hope that the
existing layout of the surrounding area with larger lot sizes would be preserved. To allow
multiple homes to be built between subdivisions created as 2.5 acre lots would be terribly
wrong, look out of place and deter from the aesthetic layout of the larger lots in the
surrounding area.
We understand that under existing code or rules, in order for property owners to be
connected to city water and sewer, they must be zoned as Urban Residential. We have
also found out that there is no solid reasoning for this code or ruling? If water and sewer
were brought into the area and Beckrich Park Estates wanted to connect, why couldn't
they do so while staying in a Rural Residential zoning? Can there be a change to the
code allowing this? Could they be included in the MUSA, remain a Rural Residential
classification, and still allow to be connected to water and sewer? The people in
Hillwood Estates do not want to prevent Beckrich Park Estates from connecting to city
water and sewer if they desire, but the possibility of multiple small lots does create a deep
concern for us. It would go against the original intent of the development and negatively
affect the character of the area originally intended for larger 2.5 acre lots.
I have only been a resident of Shakopee for about 3 ~ years now. We moved here
because it still had the small town atmosphere. Over this short 3 ~ years, I have
personally seen a big change in the city, which concerns me. With the high density
housing to the north ofHi11wood Estates taking place, traffic in the area has noticeably
increased and problem intersections have already shown up due to this high-density
housing influx. I understand that there is a balance between high and low-density
, housing; and if done correctly can. still preserve some of.the small town atmosphere: '1
believe the key to this is slower, more controlled growth. While I am disappointed in this
rapid, high density housing boom, I am also encouraged to see more elected officials who
want to control this growth better.
We in the Hi11wood Estates area would greatly appreciate your consideration in this
matter. Please take a close look at what can be done to satisfy everyone involved without
dismpting the zoning and potentially the character of the area that has predominantly
larger lot sizes.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.
Respectfully,
.{J~ i ~b~t-
Brian L Mandt
L -t . f '7l' P'
Cindy I~~'dt ,:; . 'f "".<4/1[-