Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />JULY 10, 2003 <br />The City Planner pointed out that the property is zoned R-1 and abuts a <br />wetland area. Therefore, both the standards of the R-1 District and the <br />Shoreland Ordinance apply. When both standards apply, the Code says <br />that the most restrictive standard is imposed. In this case, the 30 foot front <br />yard setback required in the R-1 Zoning District. Again, the City Council <br />has indicated that it will not consider variances for this development. <br />Knudsen asked if the need for retaining walls could be considered a <br />hardship and thus be a reason to apply a lesser requirement. <br />The City Planner indicated that it is difficult to find a hardship when <br />considering a plat for undeveloped property. The issue is the balancing of <br />the hardship with the reasonable use of the property. This particular <br />property is zoned R-I, is a large parcel, and is being proposed to be platted <br />into more lots than may be reasonable. <br />McDonnell felt that the issue of retaining walls was purely aesthetic from <br />a vertical standpoint. <br />Duray pointed out there are major changes in the final plat from what was <br />approved as a preliminary plat for The Preserve. Duray questioned <br />whether the property owners in the area have been given reasonable notice <br />of these changes and the chance to comment on them. <br />McDonnell again indicated that the changes are vertical in nature. He <br />noted that the number of lots, grading, and utilities have not changed. He <br />noted that the roads are in the same location. McDonnell also indicated <br />that they have discussed the changes with Steve Brausen, one of the <br />impacted property owners. McDonnell indicated that City staff has seen <br />revised plans with retaining walls since late March. <br />Keis asked if there was anyone from the general public wishing to <br />comment on this matter. <br />Tom Hartigan expressed concern with the final plat and the location of <br />some of the lots in relation to the ordinary high water line. Hartigan felt <br />that some of the lots proposed would be unbuildable at their present grade. <br />If retaining walls make these lots buildable, Hartigan felt that water <br />overflowing from the wetland into these lots would undermine the <br />integrity of the walls. Hartigan expressed concern that the developer is <br />trying to make unbuildable lots buildable through the installing of <br />retaining walls and the addition of fill. Hartigan felt the development was <br />too dense and would not work. <br />-9- <br />