Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD <br />March 8, 1995 <br />S Brixius indicated the local requirement is 40 foot, if <br />changed, the local ordinance should be changed. <br />Ms. Donlin encouraged the Board to wait for comments from <br />the 20/20 Vision program, she did not want to discredit <br />the efforts of staff, but indicated residents might have <br />ideas not mentioned previously. <br />• <br />Mr. Brixius indicated staff is fulfilling a mandate to <br />establish this ordinance, if in the future there are <br />comments from the city, there could be amendments. <br />Mr. Alan DeMotts, indicated if a state statute is <br />referred to, the statute should be included in the <br />resolution for the resident to review. <br />Mr. DeMotts referred to page 11, subd. C, referencing <br />dock location. He indicated residents who live near the <br />lake should be given an opportunity to build a dock. <br />Mr. DeMotts did not agree with the fact a house would <br />have to be built in order to have a dock. Mr. Schones <br />indicated if an outlot is owned by a number of <br />individuals, a dock could not be built unless a home is <br />built. Mr. Brixius indicated this is correct. <br />Mr. Mesich inquired if this is in the model ordinance. <br />Mr. Brixius indicated no, this was drafted to be <br />consistent with the access ordinances in the city <br />currently. <br />Chair Pro -tem inquired if there is a home association, <br />could there be a common dock. Mr. Brixius indicated <br />through a Planned Development Overlay, that could be <br />established. Mr. Brixius indicated the previous <br />ordinance was silent to this, so it would have been <br />prohibited. <br />Mr. Brixius indicated previous agreements would be <br />grandfathered -in, but new developments would be required <br />to follow the ordinance. <br />Mr. DeMotts indicated a Planned Development Overlay and <br />access should be required by every developer. Mr. <br />Brixius indicated it may not be appropriate for every <br />lake to have a common access, it would not be prudent for <br />the city to require this. <br />Mr. DeMotts referred to page 27, there is a typographical <br />error the subdivision should read 1102 instead of 1002. <br />Mr. DeMotts noted page 29, inquired if all Planned <br />Development Overlays are required to connect to water and <br />sewer. Mr. Brixius indicated this to be correct. Mr. <br />DeMotts inquired if this would include a home already on <br />5 <br />