Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-21-80 r City of Lakeville Planning Commission Meeting August 21, .1980 The meeting was called t~ order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Charles Johnson. Roll .call was taken: Present:; Antolik, Johnson, Asmus, Enright, Harvey. Absent: Ge i sness, Rice . i i Also present: David Licht, City Planner; Frank Kriz, City Engineer; Roger Knutson, City Attorney; Sid Miller{, Building Official; Alan Brixius, Northwest Associated Consultants. Review of minutes from t e Planning Commission meeting on August 7, 1980 was conducted . 80.133 Motion was made by Enri~ht, seconded by Asmus to approve the August 7, 1980 Planning Commission meeting min tes. Roll call was taken on the motion: Ayes: Antolik, Johnson, Asmus, Enright. Abstain: Harvey ~ Chairman Johnson opened the continued public hearing on the application of Jerry Everson and Thomas Ames for a preliminary plat known as Lakeview Heights located on the south side of 1$5th Sheet and approximately one-half mile east of Highway 50. • Mr. Ames introduced Ski Tucker. from Northwestern Bell Maintenance Department to discuss the relocation of ~he telephone cable running through the Lakeview Heights subdivision. Mr. Tucker stated that movement of the cable would be at the developer's expense. The telephone'~cable is located in a utility easement and has been in place since 1946. Relocation cif the cable should lower the cable 5 feet below grade to avoid conflict with other firms c~nd utilities that might share the easement.. The new placement of the cable will cause n~ problems. The City of Lakeville is not served by this cable, rather the City receives telephone service from a cable out of Farmington, so any damage that may occur to the cak~le will not result in loss of telephone service. Mr. Licht raised a questi~rn whether the concrete conduit is necessary as addressed in .the planner's report. Mrs Tucker stated that the conduit was not necessary. Mr. Licht asked whose advise the C~ty should follow, Mr. Tucker or the Northwestern Bell Engineer? Mr. Tucker stated that h ~ was head of maintenance for the cable and that the only place that the cable was place in concrete conduit was the Burnsville Shopping Center so that any cable maintenance w uld not require tearing up the parking lot. Mr. Licht also asked who was responsible if cable was damaged in public right-of-way? Stating that the City willjnot be held responsible for any damage to the telephone cable and that the Developer's ~4greementwill address the concern in such a matter. Mr. • Tucker stated that the responsibility for damages would be the developer's. Cit of Lakeville Y Planning Commission Meeting August 21, 1980 • Mr. Johnson asked if Northwestern Bell has plans for additional lines. Mr. Tucker stated that he did not know. Mr. Johnson asked if there has been any plans for abandon- ment of the cable. Mr. Tucker said that there has been some talk, but no confirmation of any abandonment plans. Mr. Harvey asked if abandonment occurred, would the telephone company reclaim the copper cable? Mr. Tucker responded no reclamation would take place Steve Grohoski asked if a homeowner or individual contractor damaged the cable who would be responsible? Mr. Tucker stated that it was the individual contractor's responsibility for damages. Mr. Grohoski asked is the City liable for damages that occur in public right-of-way? Mr. Licht said that the City will not be held responsible for any damages to the telephone cable . Ron Draper (10132 185th Street, Lakeville) stated that 185th Street is classified as a minor arterial and :will handle large traffic volumes. He was concerned that three lots abut 185th Street and this would be a safety hazard for children from the subdivision who may play near the street. Mr. Draper also was concerned that the two access points on 1$5th Street may also present traffic hazards. Mr. Draper was also concerned with the site drainage. He stated that he has only seen a memorandum from the Engineer, no drainage detail has been available. • In closing, Mr. Draper stated that the density was not in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan policies stating that the City should protect low density residential . Mr. Licht asked Mr. Draper if he checked the definition of low density in the Compre- hensive Plan. Mr. Draper said no. Steve Grohoski (18848 Chaplin Avenue, Lakeville) asked what percentage of the .plat drains to the west? Mr. Asmus stated that all drainage goes to the east. Mr. Grohoski stated that the neighboring properties opposed the proposed density. He stated that Planning District 10 is characterized by .low density and high value development and low and mid-density development is recommended for District 10. Currently there are no lots below 15,000 square feet and the proposed subdivision has lots of 11,000 square feet. Mr. Grohoski then read from fihe City Housing Plan, stating that lower density residential areas are to be protected from higher intensity uses with proper transitions, landscaping and buffering. He opposes the plat because the developer has made no effort to change the plat design and the developer has not provided adequate buffering. Mr. Grohoski also questioned whether the Commission could act on both the final plat and the preliminary plat. at the same time. Mr. Knutson responded saying the Subdivision Ordinance had been amended which allowed action on both the preliminary and final plat. Mr. Licht added that the plat is evaluated with the ordinance that is in effect at the moment. Mr. Grohoski said that he was unaware of such an ordinance and that since he had purchased a copy of the City Code he should have been informed. Mr. Licht stated that he would receive the amendment in the near future. 2 City of Lakeville Planning Commission Meeting August 21, 1980 ii Mr. Grohoski concluded, by stating the developer has not given adequate consideration. to providing alternative'~ubdivision layouts, He added that the higher density would destroy the land values c~nd the market for Larger lots in the area. Currently, larger lots are marketable and #hat redesign of subdivision with larger lots would not be economically unfeasible Dick Lawernson (Lakevil'le) questioned how Mr. Grohoski could be in favor of the proposed multiple familyl,development 1/5 mile west of the plat and opposed to the Lakeview Heights plat. I,He stated that the proposed density would help to provide more affordable homes fc~r working families. Mr. Lawernson concluded by stating the developers are creda~le men who will stay and live in Lakeville and their work will be high quality. Tom Clark (Lakeville) rased a concern that during the grading of the plat if the runoff would flow west and inta~ his pond. Mr. Kriz stated that the grading of the plat will prevent drainage from f l¢wi ng to the west . Mr. Licht stated that a grading plan is required in the plate review process. The plat drainage will go to the east. The policy of the City is that the development shall not • produce any access runo~f than what currently exists. Mr. Draper asked about he drainage review done by Mr. Kriz. Mr. Kriz responded stating that the grading ~lan is submitted with the final plat. This final grading plan must be approved prior t~ any development occurring. Once development starts, no deviation from the gradirfig plan is permitted. Mr. Grohoski asked thatthe developer provide grading and drainage plans with the preliminary plat and pro~ide copies of the plan for review. Mr. Johnson asked if a plan had been done by Mr. Kriz. Mr. Licht responded stating that a schematic drainag plan was done to check if Mr. Draper's comments of June 30, 1980 were correct. Mr. Draper stated that the collection pond was added. Mr. Licht said that was correct. Itl was added to insure that no negative .impacts would result on the. neighboring lots. Mr. Grohoski stated. than the density may permit affordable housing, however, there are other areas of the City were affordable housing can be developed.. He noted Foxborough as an example. John Adams (Lakeville) s ated that he wanted to purchase a large lot in the area. He noted that the Grohoski subdivision is a somewhat exclusive area,. however, has postponed • his decision until he kne' what impacts may result from higher density development. 3 City of Lakeville , Planning Commission Meeting August 21, 1980 • Motion was made by Asmus, seconded by Harvey to close the public hearing. Roil call was taken on the motion: Ayes: Enright, Harvey, Antolik, Johnson,.. Asmus . Mr. Asmus noted the area had been zoned R-2, 11,000 square foot lots fora long time. He questioned the Commission's right to restrict the developer from developing his land when they meet the established requirements . Mr. Asmus also stated that he opposed having a single access to the plat from 185th Street because an obstruction of the single access-would create problems for emergency vehilces. Mr. Harvey asked if drainage left the plat. Mr. Kriz responded no, Mr. Asmus asked how to protect the telephone cable. Mr. Licht responded with a recommendation from the planner's report of August 4, 1980. The City will not accept responsibility for cable damages. This shall be guaranteed by the developer's agree- ment. The cable shall also be encased in concrete conduit in the street right-of-way. Mr. Johnson asked if the Engineer's map will show the cable easement. Mr. Licht • said the cable easement will be displayed on the plat map. Mr. Grohoski quoted his Attorney's letter dated June 30, 1980, which said that the City does not have to approve a plat because it meets subdivision requirements. Approval of that plat should insure that the comprehensive plan is implemented. Mr. Knutson responded, stating that the attorney writing the letter was definding his client and the letter didn't document any statutes that supported his argument. He stated that the Planning Commission does have some leeway for decision-making. Mr. Johnson said the subdivision has no park land designated. Mr. Licht stated the Park Commission agreed to a cash donation instead of land. The Park Commission is responsible for park land dedications. Not every single family subdivision requires park {and, a subdivision this small will not have the people to fully utilize the park or afford to maintain it. Mr. Johnson stated there is no land available in the area. Mr. Licht stated that park land is not a requirement. Mr. Harvey said that by accepting cash donations from small subdivisions has resulted in no parks. Mr. Licht asked where they would place a park in this plat, no area. is acceptable. Cash contribution pays for more suitable park lands. Single family development has yard space that is suitable for children's recreational needs. Multiple family development does not. have yard space, and should require park land . Mr. Johnson stated that local parks are needed . • 4 ` i City of Lakeville Planning Commission Meeting • August 21, 1980 Mr. Harvey asked what as to be voted on. Mr. Knutson said preliminary. plat. Mr. Licht stated that the pre ions public. hearing was invalid due to the lack of a publ fished map. . 80.134 Motion was made by Asm~s, seconded by Antolik to approve the preliminary plat contingent on the developer meeting the recommendations of the planner's and engir?eer's reports. Rall call was taken on the motion: Ayes: Enright, Harvey, Asmus, Antolik . N~vs: Johnson. Mr. Johnson stated his opposition was because of lack of public recrea,~on. Mr. Licht suggested that the Commission table final plat until September 4, 1980. $0.135 Motion was made by Har~ey, seconded by Asmus to table the final plat until next Planning Commission mes~ting. I Rol I cal I was taken on th~ motion: Ayes: Anto) ik, Johnson, Asmus, Enright, Harvey The applicant was advised that the preliminary plat willbe in front of the City_Gouncil on September 2, 1980. • Ms. Enright stated that t e Planning Commission and Park Commission should meet to resolve their differences I n the park development philosophies. Chairman Johnson opened the public hearing on .the application for Mike Gannon far a rezoning of lots 2, 3 and the south 20 feet of lot 4, Block 2, Fairfield Addition, and a conditional use permit tIo expand the Old, Station restaurant at the corner of 210th Street and Holyoke Avenge . Mr. Knutson stated the meting was properly advertised. David Lich# expressed Dorothy Cannon's concerns regarding the condition of the applicant's fence on the border of hey property. The solid portion of the fence was recommended by Northwest Consultants as ~ noise barrier, however, the fence aril retaining. wal( must be corrected. Mr. Licht recommended the fence be corrected in accordance with the Building Official's recom ndations. Mr. Licht stated the applicant's request was described in the planner's report. The proposal was acceptable y zoning and the comprehensive plan and contingent. on the car lot use. doesn't exist a ter February 1A81 . Mrs. Gannon stated that he approval should be contingent on fence repairs. Mr. Gannon questioned the repairs. r. Harvey stated thatthe City should respond in the same manner as it requires its residents; .noting the fence at the municipal liquor store. i 5 City of Lakeville Planning Commission Meeting August 21, 1980 • Mr. Licht said the comprehensive plan along with other considerations make this area suitable for rezoning . 80.136 Motion was made by Enright, seconded by Harvey to close the public hearing. Roll call was taken on the motion: Ayes: Anto) ik, Johnson, Asmus, Enright, Harvey. Mr. Antolik asked if the Gannon home was sold, what restrictions would exist. Mr. Licht said the same restrictions that currently exist based upon the PUD. 80.137 Motion was made by Harvey, seconded by Johnson to approve the rezoning and conditional use permit subject to the applicant's repair of his fence within 90 days after the City repairs their fence and contingent upon the planner's recommendations. 80.138 Mr . Antolik asked i f the motion will stand as i t is ? Mr . Harvey moved to rescind the portion regarding within 90 days of the City repairing their fence. Mr. Johnson agreed and seconded. Roll call was taken on the motion: Ayes: Enright, Harvey, Antolik, Johnson, Asmus. The applicant was advised ghat his request will come before the City Council on .September 2, 1980. Chairman Johnson .opened discussion of the site plan review of the new office-warehouse building for Car Quest to be built at the corner of 215th Street and Granada Avenue in Airlake Industrial Park. Mr. Licht stated that review by the Engineer found drainage problems on the site. Mr. Kriz stated parking. on the site is adequate for the warehouse facility, however, an area for additional parking must be displayed for potential future expansion. Drainage. problems are present and a holding pond may be required, however, the Architect is wilting to work with the Engineer to resolve any problems. A certificate of survey was also recommended prior to application for building permit. Mr. Licht recommended approval contingent on the Engineer's comments. Mr. O'Shay, the Architect representing the applicant, stated only minor problems exist and that he was willing. to work with the Engineer to meet City requirements. The property owners are proceeding ,to secure bonds, and scheduling is limited, thus they are requesting the Planning Commission to take action. • 6 r City of Lakeville Planning Commission Meeting • August 21, .1980 80.139 Motion was made by Asm s, seconded by Antolik to approve the Car Quest Project, subject to City Engineer's approval and a certificate of survey prior to issuance of building permit. Roll call was taken on th~ motion: Ayes: Asmus, Enright, Harvey, Antolik, Johnson. Chairman Johnson opened discussion of the review of the new sign ordinance draft. Mr. Licht suggested review of the sign ordinance be tabled until next Planning Commission meeting . Mr. Johnson noted publics hearing is on September 11, 1980. i Mr. Licht advised the Commission of work on the Despatch Industries/Fire Station No, 1 Project and noted the req}~ired rezoning and conditional use permits. which were required. While not condoning the project pro or con, the Planning Commission has the authority to initiate the request for rezoning and conditional use permit to start the Tax Increment Project. .140 Motion was made by Asm s, seconded by Enright to initiate the rezoning and conditional use permit for the Despateh Industries/Fire Station No. 1 Tax Increment Project. Roll call was taken on the motion: Ayes: Antolik, Johnson, Asmus, Enright,. Harvey. i 80.141 Motion was made by Asmus, seconded by Enright to adjourn the meeting. Voice vote was. taken on the motion: Ayes: Unanimous The Chairman adjourned t e meeting at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pa rick Harve Acting Secretary ATTEST: ~I r~p • Charles ohnson, C air n 7