Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-05-79 • • r w CITY OF LAKEVILLE Planning. Commission Meeting July 5,:1979 The: meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by acting Chairman Larry Hazel . Roll cal( was taken: Present: Larry Hazel, Nancy Enright, John Antolik, Marvin. Geisness, Patrick Harvey, Charles. Johnson. Absent: John Asmus (arrived later). Also present: Roger Knutson (City Attorney); LeRoy Nyhus and Daryl Schneider {City Engineers), Tim Erkkila (City .Planner}. 79.86 Motion was .made by Antol ik, seconded by Geisness to approve the 21 June 1979 Planning Commission Minutes. Roll call was taken on the motion:. Ayes: Unanimous Commissioner Hazel reopened the public hearing on the Charles Holen request for variance and conditional use permit to build a house on the property located at 12305 (south side) 168th Street. Mr. Nolen presented architectural plans on the home irxlicating a two car garage on the west end of the home. Mr. Nolen indicated he would not be storing boats, trailers, etc. in his driveway, since the setback of garage to right-of-way was minimal. The. Planner reported-that the Natural Resources Committee felt the lot and se~6acks proposed were harmonious with the .existing adjacent lots. • 79.87 Motion was madeby Johnson,.`seconded by Enright to close the public hearing on the Nolen request. RoII cal) on the motion: Ayes: Unanimous 79.88 Motion made by Geisness, seconded. by Enright to grant the conditional use permit and variances conditional upon the documented approval of the City Engineer that finished floor elevations will be acceptably above flood .levels. Roll call on the motion: Ayes: Unanimous Commissioner gII7et~'~ reopened the public hearing on the Central Telephone Company Concept Sketch for a P.U.D. Central Telephone indicated they had been in contact with the City Engineer and Planner and now were proposing a P.U.D, rather than rezoning. to B-4. They discussed the general character of their development (2 buildings on the north 20 acres, screened and landscaped storage areas, etc..}. They tentatively plan to only P.U.D. he north 20 acres, but use the south 20 for an interim storm water ponding area until a central storm system becomes available. The Commission asked why this site was selected; the reply was that it was well located to their service area and it was large enough for their needs. Discussion was exchanged. about the use of 170th or Pilot Knob .for access. Intersection problems and dust from 170th were. Planning Commission concerns. The applicant proposed an east-west private mad between. theft north and south.:20 acres which they will build to City standards. Further discussion on the amount of switching equipment to the .facility was discussed and the applicant said no phone .lines other than normal office service will be involved . 79.89 Motion by Geisness, seconded by Johnson to close public hearing. RoII cal I .and .vote. on the motion: Ayes: Unanimous i 79.90 Motion by Antolik, seconded by Enright that the concept P.tJ,D: plan be approved i and that the applicant begin assembling detailed plans on building character, screening, landscaping, and that the transportation issues also be studied closely. RoII call: on the motion: Ayes: Unanimous Commissioner Hazel opened the public hearing on the conditional use request by Mr. and Mrs. Diana of 12330 West 163rd Street to construct a 1,232 square foot garage on their property.. Mr. Diana presented a four sheet packet indicating a plot layout;. a sketch of the building, and a floor plan._ The plot layout referenced. the proposed garage location as being in the middle of the lot rather than the south edge. The applicant explained how this location was preferred by one of his neighbors and it had been mentioned in his initial application as an alternate site. Two members of the audience (Hoerner and Peterson?)asked to see the location on the plans and expressed concern about possible commercial use of the site.. The City Attorney was asked if the deed restrictions would be adequate protection to control use and he said he .felt it was. -Commissioner Enright expressed concern that there. .was maybe insufficient protection from a future owner of the property using the large garage in ways other than intended. Chairman; Asmus arrived at the meeting . He questioned why the new material (passed out by Mr. Diana) was being considered because. it appears different from the initial location which the Commission had field checked. Mr. Diana asked for a waiving of a performance bond on landscaping because the new site was secluded, but that he will provide natural screening. 79.91 Motion made by Enright, seconded b Asmus to table the re uest until the next Y q Commission rr~eting so that more neighbors could be contacted and the new plans considered . Roll call on the motion to table: Ayes: Enright and Asmus Nayes: Hazel, Antolik, Geisness, Harvey, Johnson 79.92 Motion made by Hazel, seconded by Harvey to close the public hearing.. RoII call on the motion: Ayes, Unanimous 79.93. Motion by ~azvepseconded by Geisness that the canditiona) use permit be granted subject to the following .conditions: 1, That all activities be private and that no home occupation be permitted in the structure . 2. No outside storage of materials associated with the restoration and storage of antique vehicles be permitted. 3. All working activity be conducted totally indoors and such activities not include work which will generate undue noise or air pollution. 4. The structure be located as shown on the applicant's newest submission at least 83 feet from the rear .lot I ine, 63 feet from the side lot I ine and that screening in the form of .landscape treatment be provided subject to the review and documented approval of the City Planner. 5. The applicant shall prove that the access road.: can be bull to the. site without causing erosion. -A (etterfrom the City Engineer shall document his review and comments on the applicant's intention.. • 2 i • • b. That the use restrictions be recorded with-the County in a manner acceptable: to the City Attorney,: Roll coil. an the motion: Ayes: Antoiik, Asmus, Geisness, Harvey, Johnson, Hazel Nayes: Enright Chairman Asmus opened the public hearing on the Nichols request for a variance and a conditional use permit to build a home on a vacant lot at 10301 204th South. Mr. Nichols explained that. he felt tree removal on the site wilt be minimal . 11he planner relayed the Natural Resources Committee finding that the variances as proposed by the applicant were acceptable as proposed because it was consistent with existing abutting .lots. The City Engineer stated no specific plans were. needed for erosion control or grading, but that care would be needed during construction, .79.94 Motion made by Johnson, secaaded by Enright to close the public hearing. RoII call on the motions Ayes: Unanimous 79.95 Motion made by Hazel, seconded by Harvey to approve the conditional .use permit and grant the proposed variances provided that the applicant demonstrates adequate concern to prevent erosion during construction. Roll cal(-on the motion: Ayes: Unanimous •Chairman Asmus o ened the ubl is heari on the final (at of Oak Shores 6th P P ~J P ,j Addition. The City Planner and Engineer stated that no review had been conducted F because plans had not been available until July 3rd, There was concern that the access shown between Lots 7 and 8 may not be adequate for park access and. outlot "C" was to be transferred to the City as part of the plat. In light of these concerns, it was felt inappropriate to act an the plat. `Y 79.96 Motion by Antolik, seconded by Enright to table the plat until the next meeting.: Roll. call on the motion: Ayes: Unanimous Chairman Asmus opened the public hearing on Oak Shores 7th Addition rezoning.. Steve Michcud presented a statement (dated July 3, 1979) in which three. bedroom fourplexes were used to compute the cash dedication. It was stated that the calculation. ($48,000 cash contribution) would decrease if not all- units were three bedroom. The street named Blaisdell was questioned as-to whether it was allowable under the County street naming system.. There was discussion whether the rezoning. should be considered ahead of the 6th Addition final plat. 79.97 Motion by Asmus, seconded by Hazel to table the rezoning until the 6th. Addition final plat was resolved. Roll call on the motion: Ayes:. Unanimous Chairman Asmus•opened the public hearing on the Oak Shores 7th Addition Subdivision. 79.78 Motion by Geisness, seconded by Johnson to table the subdivision until the 6th Addition final plat was resolved. Roll call on the motion: ,Ayes: Unanirroous • 3 • • Chairman Asmus opened the public hearing on Lake Villa Golf Estates. Mr. Watschke of Fortune Realty explained that he wished to rat be considered #or rezoning and subdivision at: this time, while he worked on the formal process of street vacations. Mr. Watschke attended the meeting to answer any questions which may be raised by the general public and the Commission. Mr. Bob. Peterson spoke from .the audience and expressed the. hope that the Lake Vi I la .project would proceed. because it would extend utility service to the area . .The City Engineer .pointed out that the project. was attractive in that it provided an alternative way to provide urban services south of Orchard take without assessing uninterested landowners. The Commission questioned the adequacy of access roads and stated a preference for 20,000 square foot lots possibly with. variances if necessary, rather. than .rezoning the whole site for smaller lots. 79.99 At the request of the applicant, the motion was made by Johnson and seconded by Geisness that the public hearing be continued until the next Planning Commission meeting and that the .applicant work with the City staff to resolve the issues of vacating existing plats, lot sizes, the rezoning request and access. Roll call on the motion: Ayes: Unanimous Paul Swanson of Valley Engineering presented concept plans for the rezoning and subdivision of the. Cyril Schweich 154 acre site west and south of Dodd. Road and 192nd. The City Planner pointed out concerns about the adequacy of the proposed park dedication, block length, vagueness of overall proposed density, and drive through traffic. The City Engineer stated how City plans for trunk sewer extension are compatible wi#h the plat. The Planning Commission had questions on site storm sewer provisions, the need to upgrade 192nd and the ownership characteristics. Mr. Swanson explained that multiples in excess of fourplexes may be involved, but that no townhouse association or common ownership. is involved. He pointed out that the road configuration is the product of the rugged topography. To questions about the nature of the project and the demand for multiples, Mr ..Swanson stated that the owner would not likely build more than a few of the units, the lots including multiples would be for sale and they expect the market to accept multiples with no problems, The Commissionpointed out that in Tight of storm sewer ponding and drainage needs and the size of the development, apark/open space. system that was integrated might be better than totally in the northeast corner. The Commission felt that the applicant .should obtain the school districts. comment on the impact of a plat of this size . It was the consensus of the. Commission that the applicant .carefully .analyze his density, work with the City staff and -that he should proceed .with preliminary plat and rezoning . Sketch. plans for the Felix Tillges subdivision and rezoning at Dodd Road and Highway 50 were presented.. Mr. Tillgesshowed aletter from the. County which did not take issue with Mr . T i l (ges' road access points . Mr .Tillges was. asked to get a copy of this letter . into the official records. The plans presented were different from the initial proposal in that the road into the multi-family residential was shown as a 700'+ cuf-de-sac rather than extending to the north property line. It was suggested that the road continue to be planned to the property line and it canoe temporarily cul-de-saced if needed, since no hardships exists to warrant a variance on the length of the cul-de-sac.. Mr. Tillges was complemented on the subdivision aspect of the proposal . The appropriateness of the existing B-4 zoning was questioned.. Mr. Tillges offered that he was not certain that an office commercial zoning (B-1) would be adequate for his expected user buyers. Some concern was expressed about how on-site storm water storage would be accomplished. It was the consensus of the Commission that Mr. Ti{Iges proceed with preliminary plat and rezoning. 4 • Tim Erkkila with Midwest Planning gave a brief overview of he newly developed Parks and Open Space. Plan Report. It was explained that it was a framework type plan with built-in flexibilities to accommodate municipal growth at any rate.. Commissioners were encouraged to examine the document to facilitate their own use of the report. A letter invitation to a discussion about the preservation of agricultural land to beheld at Empire Township on July 19th was read. That is the .date. of the next Planning Commission meeting. The. agenda for July 19th was briefly discussed. It is expected that Comprehensive Plan work will covered . 79.100 Motion was made by Enright, seconded by Antolik to adjourn the meeting. RoTI cal I on `the motion to adjourn: Ayes: Unanimous • Meeting was adjourned by°the Chairman at 10;50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~wlN~l~~J\ • ~~~~~ti John Asmus, Chairman Secretary 5