Loading...
1981 05 13 . . e MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 13, 1981, AT 7:30 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL Members Present: Chairman A. Partridge, J. Thompson, C. Watson M. Thompson, H. Noziska, W. Thompson. Members Absent: L. Conrad Staff Present: B. Waibel, M. Koegler, B. Foreman Discussion, Comprehensive plan Draft Revision Reference 1990 MUSA Line: The Comprehensive Plan map located between luSO and luSl should be amended to reflect the change found on the exhibits submitted to the Planning Commission that evening. Essential change is to move the MUSA line along Highway S and that the newly included parcels be designated for campus business and residential low density as indicated on said exhibits. Motion was made by J. Thompson and seconded by M. Thompson to recommend to the City Council the changes to the Land Use and Sewer Plan Elements to incorporate Minnetonka, Inc proposed site. Five members voted aye, M. Thompson - Nay and the motion was carried. Guest Speaker, Mr. MarIan Grant, President, Marv Anderson. Topic: State of the Art in Residential Energy Design: Mr. Grant gave a slide presentation of energy and housing to the Planning Commission. Grant then answered any questions that the Planning Commission had. Planning Commission Minutes May 13, 1981 Page 2 -- Sketch Plan Review, Quady Property, Tonka West Properties, Inc.: Mr. Waibel read his Planning Report to the Planning Commission. It was indicated that this request first came up in May 1978 and then revised in April 1980. The Planning Commission should review the.intersections of the different proposals. Mr. Hess, the developer, stated that he would like to get the input from the Planning Commission to see how they feel about his request before he goes on with the plans. Mr. Hess explained that in View B the lights wouldn't shine into the windows of the house at the end of the street, Plan 4 doesn't create unusual shaped lots, has a steep grade but could attach to Nez Perce. Plan #4 has a T intersection shown to discourage fast drivers. Mr. Hess stated that he would like to move Narcisus' center line to the south to make lots l-S larger. Mr. M. Thompson asked how many lots were being proposed? Mr. Hess answered 29 lots on 10~ acres. - No adjoining property owners came to the Planning Commission meeting tonight. Mr. Waibel indicated that this street could take some of the traffic that uses Pleasant View Road to get to Hwy. 101. The Planning Commission want this street to be a city street and not a collector street. Mr. Waibel explained that any- road that has 1,000 trips times a day is classified as a collector. Mr. Partridge asked if the jog in the road was to prevent traffic from going SO mph. Mr. Hess indicated that it was. Mr. M. Thompson asked staff what the road width would have to be. Mr. Waibel indicated that they would have to have a SO' right-of-way .qo-. The request would be considered a replat since the property is platted already. Mr. M. Thompson asked why the plan shows the neighboring property in Mr. Hess's plan. Mr. Waibel indicated that the reason is to show the possibilities for the future. Doesn't want to create a street that will impose hardships for the other property if they want to develop their property in the future. e May 13, 1981 Page 3 Quady Property -- Mr. Partridge asked staff if it made any difference if the proposed road was lined up with Lake Lucy Road or not? Mr. Waibel indicated that whenever possible they should match up roads, aligning the proposed road to Lake Lucy road wouldn't necessarily create a negative impact. The concensus of the Planning Commission is that 5 members want the roads to line up and Ms Watson indicated she is against the idea. Mr. Noziska indicated that he would like to see a compromise between the two proposed plans for the attachment to Nez Perce. Wants to see a 900 intersection. Mr. Hess asked if he could connect Nez Perce with Narcisus to have a curve instead of an intersection. Might possibly have to modify the end of Nez Perce somehow. Mr. Partridge asked Mr. Hess if it would be possible to connect the two cul-du-sacs. Mr. Hess replied that it would be expensive, the soil is bad and there are underground sewer pipes located between them. e The Planning Commission is not looking at this road as asaftey valve for the western half of Pleasant View Road. Mr. Partridge indicated that he would like to see less lots. Ms. Watson asked how deep the lots are? Mr. Hess indicated that the are approximately 130 feet deep. Mr. M. Thompson asked what the terrain is like? Mr. Hess explained that the terrain is rolling with some open space, some is wooded. Mr. Hess stated that a custom builder would be building the houses. Ms. Watson suggested that the lots be somewhat similar in size as the others in the area. The frontages are the same. Mr. Waibel asked that the Planning Commission encourage the applicant to work with the staff on this request. e Replat Request, Lots 16, 16, 17, 27 and 28, Minnewashta Creek 2nd Addition, Remarco Development, Inc.: Mr. Mertz explained that this item is a sketch plan review, the applicant has approval for duplexes and is a~king the Planning Commission if he could have townhouses 1nstead. Planning Commission Minutes May 13, 1981 Page 4 - Mr. Ritter indicated that he owns all the lots except for Lot 29, but the owner of Lot 29 also would like to have his lot changed from duplex to townhouse. Mr. J. Thompson Commission call be deposited in by M. Thompson. made a motion to recommend that the a public hearing and that necessary the amount as decided by the staff. All in favor. Carried. Planning escrow Second Sketch Plan Review, 2 Residential Lots, N.W. Corner of Lake Lucy Road and Powers Blvd., Helen Jaques: Mr. Waibel explained this request that the property is pre- sently zoned R-lA and Ms. Jaques requests that this property be rezoned to R-l. Mr. Waibel indicated that this will not be creating a spot zone. This request will need a variance to subdivision 33, Mr. Waibel recommended that Ms. Jacques prepare a preliminary plat. Mr. Waibel indicated that a variance from subdivision ordinance 33 would be needed because no new subdivision shall be permitted to front onto any state, county or city highway. Lake Lucy Road is in the Comprehensive Plan to be a collector street. Ms. Jacques indicated that there is no municipal water on Lake Lucy Road. ~ The concensus of the Planning Commission is that they have no problems with this request. Mr. J. Thompson made a motion to hold a pulbic hearing for the purpose to rezone the property from R-lA to R-l and to subdivide the property. Second by Mr. Noziska. All in favor. Carried. Sketch Plan Review, 3 Residential Lots, Lake Riley;: Blvd., Robert Rogers: Mr. Waibel explained that this request is for 3 lots owned by Mr. Rogers with 2 sewer assessments along with the NEly most ll,220 square~feet of the property. so described in the Book of Deeds 64, Page 179, Carver County to be replated into 3 buildable lots. Mr. Waibel indicated that according to the the lots on Lake Riley have to be 20,000 square feet. Mr. M Thompson asked what size the existing lots in the area are. Bob stated that the existing lots are a lot smaller because they were platted a long time ago. - Planning Commission Minutes May l3, 1981 Page S e Mr. Rogers indicated that the lots that he is proposing are larger than those in the area. Mr. Rogers is requesting a variance for the lot size. Wants to take 3 platted lots and the adjoining property to make 3 lots. All the lots will be under the minimun buildable size but will still be bigger than those in the area. Mr. Mertz indicated that building permits could be requested on the lots as they are now, would need a variance for but the request could be denied. Only 2 assessments on the 3 lots the applicant could apply for 2 building permits. Mr. J. Thompson stated that the lS,OOO square foot minimum would be reasonable. Ms. Watson indicated that she would be willing to think about 2 lots and not 3 lots on the property. Mr. M. Thompson felt that 20,000 square foot minimum should be upheld. Mr. Noziska stated that the applicant should be able to have 2 lots for 2 assessments. e Mr. W. Thompson indicated that lS,OOO square feet would be large enough. Mr. Mertz asked the applicant if after hearing the Planning Commissions comment if they would like to apply for a public hearing. The applicant would have to apply for a subdivision and variance request. The DNR has to be notified if less than 20,000 square feet. Mr. Rogers indicated that this is the last of the SO' lots and that he wants to be fussy about how this request is replatted. Mr. Rogers indicated that he feels singled out, all the other lots in the area are SO' and he is proposing larger lots. Wishes to pursue and apply for a public hearing. Mr. J. Thompson made a motion to have a public hearing to replat lots 1,2,3 and the NEly most 11,220 square feet of the property so described in Book of Deeds 64, page 179, Carver County and for a variance for lot size and assessments. Second was made by Mr. Noziska. All in favor. Carried. Ms. Watson made a motion to adjourn. Second by Mr. J. Thompson. All in favor. Carried. -