12-10-2020 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 12, 2020 3 The City Engineer replied that the wetland delineation has been approved by the watershed. He stated that fill cannot be placed in a wetland and advised that property owners are supposed to stay out of the wetland buffer area and keep that natural. Commissioner Buesing asked if the minimum lot size would be met if the wetland buffer is not included. The Community Development Director replied that the lot sizes are generous and would comply, with the exception of lot 14. Commissioner Johnson asked how the developer decided on 15 lots, as there are so many variance requests to reach that number of lots. She noted that the staff presentation explained that the lots are narrower at the street and get wider towards the back but advised that multiple lots remain the same width from front to back. She stated that the total variance request would equate to two plots of land in terms of road frontage. She stated that perhaps 13 lots should be proposed in order to provide conforming street frontage for more, or all of, the properties. Dean Hanson, representing the applicant, stated that he owns Hanson Builders and noted that his company has participated in two projects in Little Canada before and has been in business for the past 40 years. He stated that over the past few years there is an increasing demand for a little bit smaller lot with more amenities inside the house. He stated that they have developed a series of homes within their subdivisions are 50 feet wide with three car garages and range from about 4,000 to 5,800 square feet when finished. He stated that all of those homes are designed for 65- foot lots. He explained that land is a non-renewable resource, once its built upon it is gone. He stated that they are attempting to be smart with how the land in their developments it utilized. He noted that buyers have embraced the standard lot of 65 feet wide, acknowledging that the Little Canada standard is above that width. He explained that this proposal is based on the market desires of buyers. Commissioner Johnson stated that she loves the idea of developing this area and asked the grounds for the variance for the lots. Nathan Fair, applicant, stated that the grounds for the variance are related to the land stock in the community. He stated that this is a challenging site to develop because of the topography, wetlands and retaining walls. He stated that in order to make the development economically feasible, they need those extra lots and noted that also fits within the market that buyers desire. Commissioner Johnson stated that the Commission makes it determinations based on the existing policies of the City. She stated that financial hardship is not a consideration the Commission can consider for a variance. Mr. Hanson commented that another way to look at this would be that they are attempting to provide a development that would be good for the City, existing neighbors, and the people that