HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/09/1994 P&Z PacketCITY OF LINO LAKES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA
March 9, 1994
6:30 P.N.
I. Call to Order and Roll Call:
SCptINgO
II. Approval of Minutes:
February 9, 1994
III. Approval of Agenda - Changes/Additions
A. Election of Officers
IV. OPEN MIKE:
V. ACTION ITEMS:
A. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - Pine Ridge II,
Preliminary Plat
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
A. Marshan Lake Townhomes
VII. ADJOURNMENT:
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
February 9, 1994
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD'MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: John Landers moved approval of the
minutes of the January 12, 1994 meeting with the correction
that Ed Schones be listed as present. Ed Schones seconded the
motion. All voted aye. Motion carried.
Mr. Schones then asked if some changes could be made to the
Agenda including the following: Item II Approval of Minutes,
Item III Approval of Agenda, Item IV Open Mike, Item V Action
Items, Item VI Discussion, and Item VII Adjournment. Mr.
Schones then made a motion calling for the revision of the
agenda and was supported by Mr. Gelbmann. All voted aye.
Motion carried. Mr. Schones then had two items to add under
Discussion Items - a. Length of Meetings and b. Council
Minutes.
III. OPEN MIKE: No one was present to speak under Open Mike.
IV. ACTION ITEMS:
A. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - Willow Ponds Subd./Rezone
Planning Consultant Brixius reviewed this item which was
continued from the January 12, 1994 meeting of the P & Z. The
request is to Rezone a parcel of property located north of Elm
Street and east of Sunset from R-4/PDO High Density
Residential with a Planned Development Overlay to R-1 Single
Family Residential and plat 27 lots. The property in question
had previously been approved for Senior Housing, however that
particular project has not been able to secure affordable
financing and the purchase agreement on the property has been
withdrawn. The property owner would like to pursue
development of the site at this time and has therefore
requested the rezoning, back to residential, and the submittal
of the preliminary plat.
Staff review has determined that the use is appropriate for
1
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
February 9, 1994
the site and recommended approval of the rezoning and
subdivision with several conditions as outlined in the
Planning Report dated December 6, 1993.
Mr. Robinson stated that this was a very nice looking plan and
asked if the practice of sharing driveways was common on
County Roads. Mr. Brixius explained that we try to encourage
this as it is a safer arrangement on a collector or arterial
roadway that has heavier traffic volume. Mr. Landers
questioned the driveway standards and Kathy Nordine asked if
permits had been obtained yet from the County.
John Johnson, representing the developer, explained that they
had discussions with the County when this project was first
presented, a few years ago, and that at that time the County
had no problems with the request. At this time they do not
have the County permits but anticipate no problems in securing
them. Additionally, driveway widths and numbers will be as
determined by the County and according to their standards.
Kathy Nordine stated that she would like to see landscaping
included as a condition of approval. Mr. Johnson explained
the landscaping plan and indicated that they will be providing
deciduous as well as coniferous trees and berming along the
35W portion of the site.
Ed Schones asked what had happened to the petition against the
project and why had it been delayed. Mr. Landers explained
that the neighbors now want to back -off from the petition.
Originally they objected to the project because they wanted to
see the Senior Project proceed - since this is not possible,
they have meet with the developer and concur that this plan is
acceptable. They would, however, like some input as to
housing types and styles. In regard to why the matter was
tabled, Mr. Johnson explained that when the preliminary plat
application was submitted, they were under the impression that
the R-4 Zoning was tied to the Senior Project. Therefore, if
that project did not go in, the property was R-1. That was
not the case so there was a delay necessary to allow the
publication and notification time in relation to the rezoning.
Mr. Gelbmann stated that he is concern about housing
diversity. The Senior Project would have provided some of
that diversity and he is disappointed they are not proceeding
with the project.
Mr. Johnson also explained that the project density is less
than 2 units per acre and the average lot size is 17,000
square feet.
Mr. Landers made a motion recommending approval of the
rezoning from R-4/PDO to R-1 and was supported by Mr.
Gelbmann. All voted aye. Motion carried.
2
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
February 9, 1994
Kathy Nordine made a motion recommending approval of the
preliminary plat with the conditions outlined in the December
16, 1993 Planning Report and the additional condition that
Landscaping be as outlined on the grading plan dated/revised
1/94. John Landers seconded the motion. All voted aye.
Motion carried.
B. PUBLIC HEARING - Pine Ridge II, Preliminary Plat
The P & Z was advised that the developer had requested this
item be continued until the March meeting. Mr. Brixius
briefly reviewed the request which is to plat 9.96 acres into
18 single family lots.
Mr. L. Thompson, adjoining property owner, was present and
questioned the ponding area behind his property.
Mr. Gelbmann made a motion recommending this item be continued
until the March meeting as requested by the developer. Mr.
Landers seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried.
C. MINOR SUBDIVISION - A. LaCasse, 6609 24th Street
Planning Coordinator Wyland reviewed this item which involves
a minor subdivision to split 6.21 acres from a 40 acre parcel.
Ordinance 93-18 provides "...a habitable single family home
constructed prior to July 13, 1992 may reduce their lot size
to a minimum of one acre if the balance of the property
results in a parcel of ten acres or more...". Mr. LaCasse
plans to sell the larger portion of the property for
development. The site is Zoned Rural and is located within
the MUSA Boundary. Staff has recommended approval as
submitted.
Mr. Schones asked why the property owner was splitting off
6.21 acres rather than 1 acre. Mr. LaCasse's son was present
representing him and indicated there are some out -buildings,
a septic system, and some wetlands that will be retained with
the homestead. Additionally, this was determined to be the
most reasonable configuration due to extensive wetlands on the
site.
Mr. Schones then made a motion and was supported by Mr.
Gelbmann to approve the minor subdivision splitting 6.21 acres
from the balance of the property. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
D. VARIANCE, 1049 Black Duck Court
Planning Coordinator Wyland reviewed this request which is to
allow a 4' variance from the side setback in an R-1 Zoning
District. Apparently when the house was staked the survey was
misread and it was assumed that a side yard easement of 5' was
actually 10'. The house was therefore located on the easement
line. The house is now framed and the error was discovered.
A letter is on file from the adjoining property owner
indicating no objection to the variance.
3
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
February 9, 1994
Findings of Fact for granting a Variance were reviewed and are
outlined in the staff report of February 10, 1994.
Kathy Nordine made a motion and was supported by John Landers
to approve the Variance as requested. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
V. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
A. Length of Meetings: Ed Schones proposed that the P & Z
have a "time certain" end for future meetings. This would
prohibit meetings from lasting until midnight as in the case
of last months meeting. Rick Gelbmann suggested that the
audience and the developer be given a time limit on their
comments/presentation. John Landers expressed concern that if
the time for comments is limited, some people may not have an
opportunity to speak. Al Robinson suggested that all Board
Members consider this item and it be brought back for
discussion at the next meeting.
B. Council Minutes: Ed Schones asked if it would be possible
to get the Council minutes sooner than in the P & Z Packet.
Mary Kay indicated that she would check with the City Clerk to
see if this is a possibility.
VI. ADJOURNMENT: Upon the unanimous consent of the Board the
meeting was adjourned at 8:00 P.M.
4
WEMORANDUX
TO: Planning & Zoning Board
FROM: Mary Ray Wyland
DATE: March 4, 1994
SUBJECT: Misc. Information
Due to the "light" agenda for the March 9th P & Z meeting, I have
decided to mail out the Agenda and distribute the packets at the
meeting. The action item is Pineridge II which was in your Agenda
Packet from the February meeting - the staff report has not
changed. If you would like a copy of the item before the meeting -
please let me know.
Information regarding the Marshan Lake Townhomes will be provided
by the developer, Hokenson, at the meeting - this item is for
general discussion and information only.
mk
STAFF ORIGINATOR
DATE
TOPIC
AGENDA ITEM v. A
Al Brixius, Planning Consultant
January 4, 1994
Pine Ridge II Preliminary Plat
Background
The applicant, Mr. Richard Carlson is requesting preliminary plat
approval of a 9.96 acre single family subdivision entitled Pine
Ridge II. The subject site is proposed to contain 18 lots and is
zoned R -1X, Single Family Executive Residential with a PDO, Planned
Unit Development overlay designation. The property lies east of
Ware Road and south of Pine Ridge I Addition.
Attached for reference.
Exhibit A - Site Location
Exhibit B Detailed Site Location
Exhibit C - Preliminary Plat
Exhibit D - Grading and Drainage Plan
Exhibit E -Vir.A6 Letter
Recommendatiioa
In review of the submitted preliminary plat, the majority of
required ordinance standards have been satisfactorily met and the
proposed layout of streets and lots is reflective of the
surrounding area land uses and zoning. Based on the following
analysis of issues, we reco►end that the Pine Ridge II Preliminary
Plat be approved subject to the conditions as outlined below:
A full cul.-de=sac is provided at the terminus of the western
most street within the 60 foot right-of-way. The cul-de-sac
must be constructed either within the subject plat boundaries
5775 Wayzata Blvd.' Suite 555 • St. Louis Park. Nil 55416 • (612) 595 -9636 -Fax. 595-9837
F E E- 4- 9 4 F R I 1 0 0 1 0
P
or within the adjacent westerly property. To accommodate cul-
de-sac construction, appropriate easements must be obtained.
The said cul-de-sac will be removed and right-of-way vacated
at such time when extension of the street occurs.
2. The grading plan and location of drainage and utility
easements are found to be acceptable by the City Engineer.
3 Park and trail dedication requirements are met as dictated by
the City Park Board.
4. Any other comments of City Staff.
ISSUES ANALYSIS
nez.ty, Within R -1X zoning districts, the maximum number of
dwelling units per acre must not exceed three. The proposed plat
contains 18 lots at a density of 1.8 units per acre and is
therefore acceptable according to ordinance standards.
pot Area. According to established City policy, lot area
calculations must exclude all. waterbodies. As such, the lot area
calculations on the submitted preliminary plat must be revised
prior to final plat submittal. Within R -1X zoning districts, the
minimum lot size exclusive of wetlands is 12,825 square feet. All
proposed lots meet the minimum lot area standard.
Lot MAO). A minimum lot width of 90 feet is required of all
interior R -1X zoned lots with a width of 115 feet on corner lots.
All proposed lots have been found to comply with minimum lot width
requirements.
Lrat Dei thy, According to the Zoning Ordinance, lots within R -1X
districts must provide 135 feet of depth. All proposed lots meet
this requirement as shown on the Preliminary Plat.
getbacks. The following setback requirements are required for
structures in the R -1X zoning district:
Front Yard 30 feet
Side Yard (Interior) 10 feet
(Corner) 30 feet
Rear Yard 30 feet
All lots show an ability to accommodate required setbacks.
2
F E �- 4 -9 4 F IR I 1 e @ 2 6
P - 4
wetlaxds. The subject site contains two wetlands, both of which
require some mitigation to subdivide the land and install streets
as indicated in the Preliminary Plat. The applicants have obtained
approval of the wetland mitigation plan shown in Exhibit D from
both the Army Corps of Engineers and the Rice Creek Watershed
District (see Exhibit B).
Street Configuration. The proposed layout of streets is viewed as
appropriate given the land zoned R, Rural District which abuts the
subject property to the east and south that subsequently requires
minimum lot sizes of 10 acres. The parcels which exist in this
vicinity at the present time are all 10 acres or less aid therefore
cannot be further subdivided unless brought into the City's MUSA
and rezoned and will not require street access from the Pine Ridge
Plat. A full cul-de-sac must be provided at the western edge of
the property or within the adjacent westerly property via easement
dedication. The said cul-de-sac easement will be vacated at such
time when the street is extended.
Grading and Drainages,, The required ten foot drainage and utility
easements have been placed along all lot sines and over wetland
areas which should be Subject to the City Engineer's review and
comment prior to Preliminary Plat approval. Additionally, a
grading and wetland mitigation plan has been submitted which should
also be subject to the Engineer's review and comment.
Park Dedicaon. The subject plat does not include any provisions
for park land dedication as required by ordinance. The City Park
Board should provide comment/recommendation as to the appropriate
cash contribution. Additionally, trail dedication will be
required, although the exact location of the trail has yet to be
determined by the City.
CONCLUSION
Based on the preceding review, it is recommended that the Pine
Ridge 11 Preliminary Plat be approved provided the conditions as
listed in the Executive Summary of this report are met to the
satisfaction of the City.
pc: Darrell Schneider
Randy Schumacher
Richard Carlson
3
F E -
4- -9 4
FRI 161 0$ 61
_ @ S
MONTH
1 MILE
CITY OF LINO LAKES
MINNESOTA
EXHIBIT
FES —
4 — 9 4
F R I 10:04
VeaSiZief
Mt
0
EXHIBIT B
— 4— J4 F I 1 0 _ 05 0
r
r _ O
_ .. _— - �`•. r _.._ �..�� asp �..
.2 4 Q , q.
N89'gg8&'S "W�+ \fly'' .C; ao� o t7o 0
�
30.00 e Ca to
, fat a '�° } t b ; dor ¢cf�- o
7.
9 �13Y
39,904 SF
DeN
a
8 w1 14
8,552 SF 1
wl
£N T
4
7 a
7.6385
1/4,
6 s
22,511 SF a
...MI _disk •_J
it-dvek
EXHIBIT E
F- FR I 1�0;: G 0 f
1
1 11 r
1
J
1
I. 1` -. _ 1-.. -, -. 11 . • <
1 10 0 –4;
J ° A •
L t.�
151
0.4
Valk riV
i + 900
P - 0
- d�
.t _.
j1
l
1
r
1
s
HI PT. 902.0
CAP INV.=a
1„ A.,
1-11.P T. 901.0 <1tt § tti
1
1 1 1 t
1 P 1 1
/ I 1 1
�
/ 1 1
�/ d 1 1
i
1
r• I 1
1
1te �.tt fr/.•/`i $ EXHIBIT L
.f ,
FEB— 4—'94 FR I 1 0 = OG 0
`. •. mow. a.•. .•... �.r
.1144 20 •94 14:12 NATTKE &GII . INC.`S•
RICE CURE tihT'aRfl= DISTRIC'?
sttnTR 374, .AEW ; PAW,
358S LEXXNGTQN &VENtig NOM
&MAN f3ILL5, MINMSOTA 55126
s1,Z7233.1210
. TO.
Vcwio ?EMIT ti). 93.139
cc. Cit' of LTha iii
Montgomery Watson
Inspector Ek1in
RCWO File
7IA412
93-x39 Richard S. Carlson
�r181>u�d toi Richard S. Carlson & Associates, 7671 Central Avenue NE, Fridicy. MM 5543.
L catienx Northeast quadrant of Ware Read and 62nd Street W, Lion takes
Purpose* Approval of Land Development and Wetland Alteration Plans for a
single-family resldentiai.develnpmant to be known as Pineridge II,
19 lots on 10 acres.
At their meeting on rb 29. 199 the Beard of Managers
of the Rine Creole ateme e DE reviewed youx permit
applLoettort and the, rocommendetion oil the District Engineer based
upon the followingexhibitq
1. Permit application dated July 27, 1993.
2. Letter prepared by Nattke Engineering, dated August 10. 1993, addressing wetlands.
received August 11, 1993.
3. Preliminary pint prepared by Mattke ,ltgineering. dated August 10, 1993, received
August 11, 1993.
e. Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by Matto Engineering. dated August 10, 1943.
received August 11, 3993.
5. MPCA Notice of Intent to Oracle Area Over G Acres, dated August 20. 1993,
received August 23, 1993.
6. fetter prepared by Mattke Engineering, dated December 2, 19934 received
December 2 19934 summarizing wetland impacts.
7. Mery to file from late Drewry dated November 10, 1993, received November 10. 1993.
verifyingwetland classification.
8. NEC -1 caculations for 1- and 100 -year storm runoff and ponding volumes,
dated December 2 1993, received December 2, 1993.
9. Skinner calculations for outlet for wast pond. dated December 2, 1993,
received December 2, 1993.
10. Grading and sediment erosion control plan prepared by Mattke Engineering, last
revised November 28, 1993. received December 2, 1993.
11. Cash Surety in the amount of 53,000 received December 22, 1993.
12. uS Amy Corpsct Engineers Nationwide Permit authorization letter dated
Deceit$ er 20, 1993, reCeivcd December 2i, 1993.
They found the project as planned to be in accordance with the
Rales a Regulations and Guidelines of the District and therefore
approved the permit as requested with the following* additional
stipuxetioxi,ra NO ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS
It is the: redponsibiLity of the Permittee to provide 00.,,1,1, meresu res
nec+aseary to contain sediment. on the alto dazing conetructiost.
rhie
Mly require the sea* of erceion contra.. Vaninix+ew flit octtl4ned
yx
EXHIBIT E
F E F- 4 -'q 4 F R I 1 0 0 7 0
• JPsa '54 24; 13 HarmKE 'EirGjs E
61
P _ 1 0
r «� _
TCI= P833
RCwD PERMIT NO. 93-1n, continued; Pagan
on the erosion oantral plan. If this requirement is not mat, the
Permittee may be ordered to provide additional erosion control
measures 4f deemed neceos ry by the biatxict Inspector.
Immediately uupon completion of rough grading, 9tQrmwater I inagement
features must be completed according t:rrlans pezmittvd by the
District. It ie also the responsibility of the property owner to
provide necessary maintenance to assure that the ItOrMiw ter
management systems approved as part of this Permit will continuo
to function as originally designed.
XQTE FOR PROVIDERS OF A CASH SCRET t Failure to implement and
maintain the sediment-ixosion control and cover establishment
measures outlined is the permit erhibits3 may result in forfeiture
of your cash surety. If such ssaeseureS are satisfactorily provided,
the mash surety' will be returned with interact after permanent
vegetative cover has been esstss�sbliehed. i'Xeasse notify the District
Office in writing when permanent vegetative caver has been
established and a final inspection will be toads.
'shoo (2) ins tions of the . project site are included with this
Permits one after erasion control xanssssaurea are in place and ene
after project completion and reeegctati.on, and ei r be conducted
to assure compliance with all agreements, terms, and stipulations
of this Permit.' Failure to comply with the foreagoing may =telt
in rescission of the Permit, and is in violation of Chapter 112.89
1SA1 a mild or. Any additional inspection, requested or
required, will. be billed at $25/visit.
fit`hi+r dbcuee t is not transferable, and is valid for one (l) year
atter the date of i eauance. Fo construction la authorized beyend
the expiration date. If pwrtittee requires more time to complete
construction, a zeal of the permit will be necessary.
Please contact ACWD at 493.0634 when the project is about to
commence no ,an inspector may view the work in progroe ." By
acceptance of this Permit, Permittee has co eented to the
foregoing. The enclosed O%ner's Certification form must be
completed and forwarded within ten (10) days of project completion.
P, C Rvwiscd 119191
act
res diet,
Eugene Z. Peterson
ar. o ' managers
2nd Vice -Pr a dent
'.7
aretaxyf *CWD pard o Ham:weirs/
Andrew .T.•„ ,arCina . Sr.
s�4 rtu ry 19 . 1944
Dotes Isssuaac+
=SEN
MEMORANDUM
ST PAUL, MN
❑ MINNEAPOLIS, MN ❑ ST CLOUD, MN
TO: Darrell Schneider
FROM: Steve Heth
DATE: February 3, 1994
RE:
❑ CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI ❑ MADISON, WI
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
Engineering Review of Pine Ridge 2nd Addition
SEH No. A-LIN03336.00
1. Preliminary Plat
A. No location given (section, town and range).
B. Boundary does not close.
2. Grading and Drainage
A. Easements - Provide adequate drainage easement on Lot 6, Block 2 for lateral
drainage at back of lot.
B. Street - Street should end with cul de sac on the west end.
C. Typical Street Section - Current standard for location of private utilities in
common trench may be changing. Be aware that a new detail may need to be
used.
3. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main
A. Sanitary - Invert at tie-in on north end of Coyote Trail should be 877.75 (from
record drawings).
B. Consideration should be given to installing sanitary sewer deep enough for future
extension to the west. (Shorten drop in manhole adjacent to Lot 6, Block 2).
tlo