Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 31 1973 Planning Commission minutesSCOTT COUNTY P44a4 .Fade, M4sneAd4 55372 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION - Minutes of May 31, 1973 'rhe meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Bill Bissonett. Members present were Walter Jobst, Harold Miller, Dan Stack, Luis Tercero, and Pat Walker. Others present were Mayor Stock and Councilman Watkins. Steve Montreuil asked for a variance from the 15 foot side yard set -back in Lot 4 16, Block I, First Addition of Hidden Oakes. He asked for a variance to 12' on one side, and 13' on the other side. Front yard set -back is 30'. Only the comers of the building are out, with the center line of the building at or exceeding the 15' minimum side yard set -back. Bill Bissonett made a motion, Luis Tercero seconded, to grant the variance. Motion carried. Mr. Kendell Conway asked for a variance on Lot 6 in Maplewood. On July 27, 1971, the Scott County Commissioner., originally granted a variance to build a house on the lot with a 10 foot side yard set -back. Bill Bissone;; made a motion that the original variance be reapproved and that the house can be built after sewer and water are in the area, seconded by Luis Tercero, motion carried. The lot will be en- larged by 12 feet, taking the land from Lot 0 5. I Wally Stock presented a request from Raman Pauly to build a garage within 4 feet of lot 6 on the unofficial plat map of Zweber Addition in NI /2 Section 2-114-22, Scott County. The plat shows Lot 6 as a road easement. The Planning Commission will accept his garage site, if Mr. Pauly will present a letter to the commission stating that he will not hold the village responsible for damage, during snow removal operation, if the neighboring lot becomes a road. Motion was made by Harold Miller, seconded by Tercero, motion carried. The next meeting will be June 14th., 1973 @ 7:30 P.M. The meeting adjourned at 9:20 P.M. Walter Jobst, Secretary Planning Commission "'116 eel a/ a Qeaid*d A6A6 e6awAfr. Vd la" 4 /AU" Za/m SCOTT COUNTY /4> 04 AIM, M&sxPd*& 55372 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION - Minutes of May 17, 1973 Meeting calle d to order at 7:37 P.M. Members present were Pat Walker, newly appointed Commissioner, Bill Bissonett, Walter Jobst, Dan Stack, Luis Tercero, Councilman Tom Watkins and Mayor Stock. The planning commission received a planning guide from the Metropolitan Council. Jim Hannan asked the planning commission what 11 Dan Stack will answer the letter, pointing out the running through the community. is doing about preserving the wild life of the area. Conservation (E -L) Zoning, and the green belts The Prior Lake Association also submitted a letter stating that their membership unanimously apposes the rezoning of any property abutting the lake. George Algren presented a petition with 289 signatures signatures stating 'We, the undersigned, a opposed to Mitchell Pond..." Jim Boerhave and Willard Lundstrom presented the preliminary plat plans of Maple Hills �f Chattonka Beach road between Co. Rd. 42 and Prior Lake. An accompanying letter site plan. Bill Bissonett made a motion that - swath modifications, the plan be approved. are (1) Lot I, 2, and 3 be made into just 2 lots and lots 4 and 6 cannot be built upon uni are in the area and that the road easement should be 60 feet wide. Walter Jobst second Motion carried. In other action, John Panne from Burmel Smaby presented a plan to build one house on Lot 7 and 8 of Maplewood Town site on an estimated 15,000 foot lot. The planning commission asked how far is the proposed house site from the 904' elevation of the lake shore line. We need a 75' setback. Also needed are letters from adjoining- neighbors If the side yard set backs are to be redueed,as well as a map showing contour lines of the map. Mr. Panne will appear before our next meeting.`` Walter Jobst recommended that the villaip obtain a set of quarter section plat maps so that we can get a more accurate picture of any given neighborhood. Mr. Humberg asked about a building permit for a utility shed off Co. Rd. 81 to be set 130 feet back from t road. The commission recommended that we forward the project to the County Engineer for approva. In final action on the Mitchell Pond P.U.D. , Walter Jobst moved not to approve the of Mitchell Pond, based on the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance, specifically the section development, section 6, paragraph 101). Also, that the density requested (R -3) ;is not immediate area, which is R -1. The motion was seconded by Luis Tercero. Motion can R to the (l) „�� a tl a apt 2616 eon„ May 17 - Planning Commission minutes continued Recommendations are as follows: Density of homes not to exceed R -1 using net land excluding streets and the pond. That a seperate entrance and a exit off Red Oaks Road be provided and that the road within *he project be looped. That lakeshore access not be considered as part of the P.U.D. That additional information be supplied on the total development, size, (surveyed) topragraphical map, useable acreage and other information required in P.U.D. Section 6 -10-d. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:27 P.M. Next meeting to be 5/31 C 7:30 P.M. Walter Jobst, Secretary Prior Lake Planning Commission I° . SCOTT COUNTY /JU44 —fla4e, Afososedo& 55372 PRIOR LAKE PL: „`DINING COMMISSION - Minutes of May 3, 1973 Mitchell Pond Planned Unit Development Public Hearing Members present: Bill Bissonett, Walter Jobst, Dan Stack and Councilman Tom Watkins, Mayor Stock and 36 citizens. Tom Watkins read the public notice as published. Dan Stack explained the P.U.D. Ordinance. Emmett Knox and Frank Wicker presented a map of the P.U.D. and described the property (22 acres, 89 units) to be developed in clusters of 4 units per townhouse in stages at about 16 units per year. The density would be about 35% greater than R -I Zoning with an estimated market value of 330,000 to $50,000 per unit. Emmett Knox then went on to exp.am that they plan to include a 100 foot lakeshore lot to be owned by the Mitchell Pond Association, which would then own 6 to 8 boats to be used on a rental basis by members of that association. At this poin t there were questions from the audience and from the board: tv , ,'' f arry Nickelson asked about sewer. Walter Stock answered that a public hearing will be held sometime in May. Walter Jobst asked when the 100 foot lakeshore lot was added to the project, since it was not included in the earlier presentation to the Planning Commission or to Mitchell Pond Land Survey 0 18. Doan Stack and Tom Watkins concurred that the lakeshore lot was not included in the original plan. Emmett Knox stated that the lakeshore lot was only an idea, submitted for our consideration. There was much opposition to this aspect of the plan, and it was agreed that the public hearing be limited to Mitchell Pond, without the lakeshore property. Q. What are the advantages of a P.U.D, over standard R -1 zoning? A. Long range plans for sewer, water, open space, etc. can be developed for the total area, instead of a piece at a time. Edna Poquete asked about the influence of this P.U.D. on our schools. Emmett Knox stated that this type of townhouse produces nine school age children per unit. (80 school age children, total). Several people commented that the statistics on school aged cheldren was low and questioned why then 3 bedroom units. Knox stated that three bedroom units are popular even with families without children. Jack Andrews asked about the height of the townhouse units. Knox stated that they were no higher than a regular rambler. Stanley Becker asked about the distance of the buildings from the road. I�ssiilil`nox: The houses on the ridge are about 40 feet from the road. „ 11/6 eenAn of is 6 waW 2616 ems„ Nickelson: The road on the ridge now is a private dirve. Would it have to become a public road? nox: Yes. Len Grassini: Is the developer responsible for road building? Watkins: Abutting and benefitttng properties would pay for it. Dick Togens: Was the proper hearing notice given to people in the neighborhood, since many summer cabin owners have not come out yet? Stack: I contacted the abutting property owners. Nickelson voiced concern that the road costs could cause him to lose his home. Gary Ferguson stated that everyone in neighboring Lakeside Manor owns a boat and it would be safe to assume that they will also be in Mitchell Pond. Does the corporation, Mitchell Pond, own the lakeshore lot? Knox: No Ferguson: Does Wicker Knox? I! Knox: No . He stated that in regard to the roads, he feels they will have to help pay for it. He said he brought up the lakeshore access as a separate plan and that Mitchell Pond will have a swimming pool right In the project. John Pederson asked If Mitchell Pond Association could buy up more lots on the lake. Watkins: The area is zoned R -1 and will stay that way until rezoned. Togens: A petition with 300 signatures was collected at a similar hearing about one year ago, wanting longer lot requirements on the lake. Karen Algren: 89 families is just too many to live on that parcel and so close to the lake. Ferguson: If you don't have access to the lake, will you still want the project? Frank Wicker: Yes. Marlis Bluedorn: Does the whole project get approved at once? Stack: Approval or denial of the P.U.D. is one decision. Building permits and other items could be stager, Oliver Hannan: Which set of townhouses will be the first stage? Wicker: The area at the entrance. rant Leonard: What you are doing Is to use the corporatioi to get around the one home for 10 feet of lakeshore area. Wicker: We volunteered the information. We can use the lakeshore lot as a single family lot. (2) Pederson: We moved out here for the low population density. Do we have to encourage this high density now? Is there an advantage to us? Wicker: We have accumulated Information on P.U.D.'s air six years. There are advantages to the home owners. Frank Anderson supports the P.U.D. concept, but objects to the high population density that goes with it. Bluedorn: If you have people near the lake, especially children, they will go through other peoples property to get to it.. John Kalton: At least as far as sewering around the lake goes, this project will help in getting it. A five minute recess was called and other business was taken upo following the recess. Len Grassinl asked for a variance on a drainfleld to within 65' from the lake and a 20' front yard setback variance at a cul'de'sac on Lot 3 Second Addn. Martinson's Island. This was approved. On a second lot, Len Grassint asked for a variance for lakeshore set back on Shady Beach Lot 12. The Planning Commission stated that since the dwelling met the 75 foot average setback from laks shore, no varience was required. The meeting adjourned at 10:45 P.M. Walter Jobst, Secretary Prior Lake Planning Commission (3) 71