Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-19-79 a CITY OF LAKEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 19, 1979 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by the Chairman, John Asmus. Roll call was taken. Present: Commission members Antolik, Johnson., Asmus, Geisness, Enright, Harvey. Absent: Hazel. Also present: Dave Licht, City Planning Consultant; Patrick Farrell, City Attorney; LeRoy Nyhus, City Engineering Consultant; Patrick McGarvey, City Administrator/Clerk 79.101 Motion was made by Antolik, seconded by Harvey to approve the minutes of the July 5, 1979 meeting as corrected. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Johnson, Antolik, Asmus, Enright, and Harvey. Nays, none. At this time Chairman Asmus reopened the public hearing on the new Comprehensive Plan, Development Framework/Policy Plan for the City. A hearing had been continued from"the June 21, 1979 meeting. Dave Licht gave a brief review of the previous hearings on the Development Framework/ Policy Plan beginning with the first hearing on May 3, 1979 Mr. Licht stated that the City had received three ,letters since the.June'21-meeting and Mr. Licht presented the questions contained in the letters and. his answers. Mr. Licht explained that the proposed performance zoning standards must be;-met even if the present zoning classifications remain on the property along I-35. Mr. Licht emphasized that there will always be a policy making factor and some discression on the part of the City Planning Commission and City Council when supplying the performance standards to development proposals. Mr. Licht explained that the I-35 corridor boundaries still have to differ in some locations from the present boundary lines of the various zoning districts which abut I-35 as of this date. He explained that when the zoning map is prepared as a part of the new zoning ordinance, that property ownership lines at the date of the plan adoption will be taken into consideration in drawing the I-35 corridor boundary. Mr. Tom Werth, an attorney representing the Mils property interest, asked what may happen if residential development occurs first in the I district and a commercial proposal comes in later as a boundary and the residential area objects due to a clash of land use. Mr. Licht explained that each development must grotect its own boundary through appropriate devices.,' Mr. McCullough, an attorney representing the Stewarts, asked about the performance standards shown on page 15 and 16 in Mr. Licht's memo of June 18, 1979. Mr. Licht. explained that it has been and still is .the City of Lakeville,s policy that the developers must pay for all of the. costs involved with the City in attaining their development proposals, either through the use of City consultants or their own. -1- ' CITY OF LAKEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Mr. Geisness asked about Item ~~7 on their interim uses on a e 1 I p g 5. t was concerned with the lack of specific identified interim uses. At this time commissioner Hazel arrived at the meeting and took his chair. Time: 8:15 p.m. Mr. Licht pointed out in a discussion that even under the present zoning ordinance a developer must present and meet certain screening requirements for their property. Commissioner Asmus raised his concern concerning the lot size requirements. in residentaal areas and desirability of having different minimum lot size zoning districts for residential uses. 79.102 Motion was made by Enright, seconded by Harvey to close the public hearing on the Development Framework/Policy Plan. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Hazel, Johnson, Antolik, Asmus, Geisness, Enright, and Harvey. Time: 8645 p.m. At this time Mr. Licht read a resolution for the Planning Commission's consideration°- in recommending approval of the plan to the Council. 79.103 Motion ~aas made by Enright, seconded by Antolik to adopt a resolution with an additional whereas concerning the publication dates of the public notice and word. corrections. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Hazel:, Johnson, Antolik, Asmus, Enright and Harvey. Nays, Geisness. Mr. Geisness stated that the reason he voted no was because of the lack of interim uses listed for the freeway corridor. He stated he was satisfied with the rest of the plan. At this time Mr. Loken appeared with the final plat of Oak Shores 6th Addition.. The City Administrator reviewed the six items listed in Mr. Licht's memo of July 13 and stated that the developer had addressed each one properly. t 79.104 Motion was made by Hazel, seconded by Enright to approve the final plat of Oak Shores 6th Addition subject to the completion of the points in Mr. Licht's memo of July 13, 1979. Roll call was taken on the. motion. Ayes, Hazel, Johnson, Antolik, Asmus, Geisness, Enright and Harvey. At this time Commissioner Asmus reopened the continued public hearing on the re-zoning of outlot E in Oak Shores 6th Addition from B-4 commercial to R-3A multiple residential. Mr. Loken explained that with `his .experience in today's market, most units are owned or occupied in quads. 79.105 Motion was made by Hazel, seconded by Antolik to close the hearing and to recommend . to the City Council the adoption of an ordinance re-zoning outldt E from B-4 commercial to R-3A multiple residential. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Johnson, Antolik, Asmus, Geisness, Enright, Harvey and Hazel. -2- CITY OF LAKEVILLE • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING At this time Commissioner Asmus reopened the public hearing on the preliminary plat of Oak Shores 7th Addition, formerly the outlot E in the 6th Addition. There was no one present wishing to speak on the plat from the audience. 79.106 Motion was made by Antolik, seconded by Geisness to close the public hearing on the preliminary plat of Oak Shores 7th Addition. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Antolik, Asmus, Geisness, Enright, Harvey, Hazel and Johnson. 79.107 Motion was made by Antolik, seconded by Enright to, recommend approval of the Oak Shores 7th Addition preliminary plat to the City Council. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Asmus, Geisness, Enright, Harvey, Hazel, Johnson and Antolik. Commissioner Asmus opened a public hearing on the application of Larry Smith for a variance to construct a garage at 16798 Galena Avenue. Mr. Smith was present and stated thht he was aware. of the rec®mmendations of Midwest Planning. 79.108 Motion was made by Antolik, seconded by Geisness to close the public hearing. • Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Geisness, Enright, Harvey, Hazel, Johnson, Antolik and Asmus. 79.109 Motion was made by Geisness, seconded by Enright to recommend the variance in the sideyard setbacks to build. a garage at 16798 Galena Avenue subject to the recommendations of Midwest Planning. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Enright, Harvey, Hazel, 'Johnson, Antolik, Asmus and Geisness. At this time Mr. Bruce Patterson presented the final plat of Niakwa Village. The Commission and. staff discussed the. proposed quad complex and staff pointed out that the recommendations are being carried out in the draft of the development agreement, which will be ready by the time the plat reaches the City Council. 79.110 Motion was made by Harvey, seconded by Geisness to .approve the final plat of Niakwa Village. and to recommend that the development agreement and restrict the outside storage of recreational vehicles and that the agreements with the Shannon Townhouses be included in the development contract.. Ro11 call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Harvey, Hazel, Johnson, Antolik, Asmus, Geisness and Enright. At this time Mr. Brad Johnson presented a sketch plan for a single family sub-division known as Fox Run The Commission, staff and Mr. Johnson discussed the sketch plan and several items that still need attention. One of the major items is the • lease with the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation on 6~ acres.. to be used as a.gravel pit. This was ormerly the Seely farm~and pit. The City Administrator stated that the staff felt in reviewing the sketch plans that either the pit operation should be properly designed and licensed if it is -3- • • • CITY OF LAKEVILLE • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING going to continue by the State under a lease with the new property owner, or that the pit should be eliminated and included in the proposed platting of .the property. At this time the Planning Commission discussed the need to require developers to submit all of the necessary information under the platting process and allow the staff time to analyze and report on that. information before a public hearing is called on a preliminary plat. Mr. Johnson was advised to continue working on his sketch plan and take into account the concerns listed"by Midwest Planning and the City Engineer and staff... 79.111 Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Antolik to table approval of the Cedar Highlands 3rd and 4th Additions to allow the few remaining items on the proposed final plats to be taken care of by the developer. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Hazel, Johnson, Antolik, Asmus, Geisness, Enright and Harvey. The Commission discussed the advisability of including in the legal notices for various plats, rezoning, variances, etc. the. street address as well as the legal description of the property to help the citizens identify with the area in reading. the legal notice. 9.112. Motion was made by Hazel, seconded by Harvey to set as Planning Commission policy and be directed to the staff not to call public hearings until all of the required material is submitted to the City and the staff has had ample time to complete its review and reports to the Planning Commission before the public hearing is called.: and an item is placed on the Planning Commission agenda. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Harvey, Johnson, Antolik, Asmus, Geisness, Enright and Hazel. 79.113 Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Antolik to ad3ourn the Planning Commission meeting. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Hazel, Johnson, Antolik, Asmus, Geisness,. Enright and Harvey. Time: 10:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, s f'~ ~ John Asmus, Chairman Charles Johnson, Se retary -4- t' ~ • RESOLUTION PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF LAKEVILLE DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE ADOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN - POLICY PLAN/ DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR THE CITY OF LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, preparation of the Lakeville Comprehensive Plan is being undertaken in compliance with the Mandatory Land Planning Act; and WHEREAS, the Policy Plan/Development Framework was presented on an informal, informational basis to neighborhood groups and property owners in six individual meetings held throughout the city from 12 July 1978 through 13 September 1978; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk placed the legal public notice of public hearing in the official city newspaper on the adoption of a new comprehensive plan to be published on April 12, 19 and 26, 1979 for the hearing on May 3, 1979; and • WHEREAS, the quarterly city newsletters mailed to each postal patron in May 1978, February 1979, and July 1979 included articles on the status and pzogress of the new Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, direct notification of the continued public hearing on the Policy Plan/Development Framework held on 19 July 1979 was provided to each postal patron of the city through the Summer Quarter (July 1979) Issue of the City of Lakeville Newaletter;'and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission believes that the City is in need of updated guidelines to direct development which is currently being pursued; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after long and careful study of the Policy Plan/Development Framework, finds that it is in the City's best interest to approve the Comprehensive. Municipal Plan as revised. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the .Lakeville Planning Commission: 1. The Comprehensive Plan-Policy Plan/Development Framework as revised is approved by the Planning. Commission. 2. The revised Comprehensive Plan-Policy Plan/Development Framework is hereby certified to the Lakeville City Council. 3. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the Policy Plan/Development Framework as a portion of the City's Official Comprehensive Plan on an interim basis. 4. Upon completion of the neighboring and affected governmental agency reviews, the Policy Plan/Development Framework and other elements of the Comprehensive Plan may be modified as deeided by the Citp Council and should finally be adopted accordingly. Adopted this 19th day of July 1979. . Chairman, John Asmus ~,f f ATTEST: Secretary Charles Jo son