Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/09/1997 P&Z Minutes• • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:40 p.m., April 9, 1997. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MARCH 12, 1997 Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to approve the minutes of the March 12, 1997 Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board meeting, as submitted. He was supported by Mr. Herr. Motion carried unanimously, 5 -0. Chair Schaps abstained. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - CHANGES /ADDITIONS Chair Schaps noted that the public hearing for item No. V.B., CB Commercial /US West, 6217 Centerville Road, Conditional Use Permit for Monopole and Base Station, will be continued to the May meeting. A representative from CB Commercial stated that the company has no problems with the staff recommendations and would prefer that the public hearing be continued to the next meeting. He further stated that if the City imposes a moratorium on monopole construction, this application should be exempted. The following two items were added to the agenda: 1) Variance for 850 Orange Street; and 2) Election of Chair and Vice Chair. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Chair Schaps opened nominations for the position of Chair. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 2 Mr. Dunn nominated Mr. Schaps to be appointed as Chair of the Planning & Zoning Board for the next year. Mr. Robinson seconded the nomination. No further nominations were made. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to appoint Mr. Schaps as chair of the Planning & Zoning Board for the next year, and was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion carried, 6 -0. Chair Schaps opened nominations for the position of Vice Chair. Mr. Robinson nominated Mr. Bill Johnson for Vice Chair. Mr. Dunn seconded the nomination. No further nominations were made. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to appoint Mr. Bill Johnson as Vice Chair of the Planning & Zoning Board, and was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion carried, 6 -0. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared the Open Mike portion of the meeting open at 6:43 p.m. Ms. Steffanie Newstrom stated that residents were promised that a playground would be put in near the ball fields by May 3, 1997at City Hall Park. With ball games every night, younger children need the playground area. Although the equipment has been received, the City Park and Recreation Department has not set a date for installation. There are volunteers who would be willing to put the equipment in. Chair Schaps noted that Mr. Marty is ill, and suggested that Ms. Newstrom contact Mr. Barry Bernstein who is taking his place in the interim. Ms. Wyland stated that staff will also follow up on the issue. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the Open Mike portion of the meeting at 6:45 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Herr. The motion carried, 6 -0. V. ACTION ITEMS A. Recreational Vehicle Ordinance - PUBLIC HEARING Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 6:48 p.m. Planning Consultant Brixius stated that a text amendment to the Recreational Vehicle Ordinance (RV Ordinance) is before the Board regarding storage of RV's. The ordinance currently provides: • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 3 "One travel trailer, motor home, camper, or similar vehicle may be parked or stored on a residential site when used by the family residing in the dwelling on such site. Such vehicles or items shall have affixed thereto current registration or license plates as required by law and shall be stored so that same shall meet all side, front and rear yard setback requirements of the residential section of this ordinance and such parking or storage shall otherwise meet all other requirements of any other City ordinances and any state laws. None of such parked or stored vehicles or items shall be connected to any water or sewage disposal system on said residential property where same is so parked or stored." This ordinance provision mandates storage setbacks for RV's of 30 feet from the front property line, 30 feet from the rear property line, 10 feet on one side and 5 feet on the garage side. This is quite restrictive for smaller urban size lots that are being developed in the City, where homes are being built at the 30 -foot setback line and RV's are in violation if parked in the driveway in front of the home. The proposed change to the ordinance reads as follows: "Such vehicles or items shall have affixed thereto current registration or license plates as required by law and shall be stored in either side or rear yards no closer than five (5) feet from the lot line. No vehicle storage shall be permitted in front yards or side yards abutting a street, and such parking or storage shall otherwise meet all other requirements of any other City ordinances and any state laws." Mr. Brixius stated that in consideration of the public response to this change, the proposed revised ordinance has not been adopted. Numerous letters and phone calls have been received. The matter before the Board is not to adopt the proposed new language but to listen to public input and direct staff on how this issue should be addressed. Staff is requesting that the public hearing be continued in order to allow time to develop ordinance language that reflects the Board's direction. Ms. Wyland stated that she has received many calls over the past several days that are both pro and con. Her tally is 45 calls and 18 letters for no change in the ordinance. The number supporting a more restrictive ordinance is 66 calls. A resident in the City privately distributed letter response forms for residents to send in. These were not sent out by the City, but she received 6 in favor of a more restrictive ordinance. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 4 Chair Schaps stated that he received 157 telephone calls and 24 letters, one in favor of the ordinance change and the rest opposed to any change. He polled Board members for their position on the revised ordinance. Mr. Dunn stated that he supports the revised text amendment to the ordinance. Mr. Robinson stated that of the calls he received, one person supported the new change, and 120 want the ordinance to stay the same. The ordinance has to be updated to something everyone can live with because many are in violation of it the way it is currently written. Ms. Dahl thanked the residents who called her. She likes to have citizen input and wants everyone to know that Board members are not unreachable. Board members make mistakes, change their minds and appreciate letters and citizen input. The remaining five Board members supported the ordinance as it is written with a revision to allow RV parking legal in driveways that is currently being violated because of the setback requirements. One resident stated that the ordinance is confusing because it only refers to allowing one RV vehicle. There is no allowance for two trailers, or a boat and camper. Mr. Brixius agreed that the current ordinance language provides for one RV per site. The reference to a "similar vehicle" needs to be defined. He recommended that the revised ordinance address: 1) number of RV's and their size; 2) setback requirements from the street; and 3) storage of RV on a paved surface, sod or gravel. Mr. Nicholas Nagen, 850 Olive Street, stated that he would like to see the 30 -foot setback requirement eliminated from the ordinance. If that is done, most RV's would be in compliance with the present ordinance, and Lino Lakes Police do not have the time to measure storage setbacks of RV's. Ms. Mary Archer, 201 Egret Lane, Rice Lake Estates, stated that the City should be careful about making any ordinance unduly restrictive. She objected to the text amendment for three reasons: 1. The City should not restrict a healthy and wholesome form of recreation of middle class families. There are many young families in her neighborhood who are struggling to raise their children, educate them and have a modicum of the good life. Having spent her life working in the court system, she can testify that there are far worse things than seeing a boat in the neighbors' yard. • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 5 2. There is not going to be a positive economic effect if highly restrictive regulations are put in place. She believes that fears of diminishing property values is fallacious because she has documentation from a realtor that shows a steady increase in property values within the City of Lino Lakes, even with boats. If 25 percent of the 2,000 boats in Lino Lakes were lost from restrictive regulations, that would also be a loss of $10,000 to the Water Quality Fund under state statute 886B.515. By statute, the fees for boats go directly to that fund. The loss of water quality will affect everyone. Also, the City will not receive the new license fee for boat trailers, another $6,500 with the loss of 500 boats. 3. She finds the amendment offensive because it takes away from the American dream. What is great about this country is that not just the rich can have simple pleasures that come from having a boat. This is not the kind of spirit residents want in Lino Lakes. Mr. Brian Engle, 7136 Whippoorwill, stated that an RV is called a recreational vehicle but was first identified as a "road vehicle." Ordinances were originally passed to restrict road vans because residents did not want to see long road vans parked in front of their homes. The City is lumping all of these vehicles together to include snowmobiles, boats and small hauling trailers. Every time the City gives residents a choice, rights are taken away such as garbage hauling. Mr. Chuck Beckman, 6226 Laurene Avenue, stated that he distributed flyers to appeal to owners of boats and snowmobiles and let them know there may be restrictions placed on parking in driveways. Pushing the ordinance will make people pay for storage off their premises and that is wrong. Ms. Linda Elliott, 2001 Otter Lake Drive, stated that a common sense solution is needed. The ordinance reads "...recreational vehicles and similar vehicles... ". She would like to see the word "similar" stricken and the ordinance rewritten so that campers can be parked in driveways. Everything else should be left alone. There are nuisance ordinances, and there is no need to layer law over law. Mr. Paul Brand, 6789 East Shadow Lake Road, stated that he is tired of having the City intrude into his life. What he does on his property is his business. He moved to Lino Lakes for the recreational activities available and is angry that the City has responded with an even more restrictive ordinance that significantly affects the enjoyment of home ownership. He noted the petition of 57 signatures submitted to the City and stated that if the ordinance is going to be broadened in scope to include snowmobiles, campers and trailers, it should also include bikes, picnic tables, ladders and other personal property in yards. He expressed concern about one Board member who he believes has used his position to facilitate a personal agenda. A Board member should have an open mind to represent citizens rather than having a personal agenda. There is confusion Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 6 over the definition of vehicles. The proposed ordinance would mean that nothing could be parked in the driveway, and residents would be forced to park in the street and move vehicles once a day to comply with Minnesota law. Mr. Brandt stated that he is very upset and feels that standards are being dictated and judgment passed on his lifestyle. How can families with no or one garage have the same privilege to enjoy the lifestyle of those in Lino Lakes who may have more? Ordinances must pass a test of constitutional reasonableness. It would be unreasonable to restrict recreational equipment of Lino Lakes residents. Mr. Dunn stated that he does not want to make this a personal issue. It is his opinion that the Planning & Zoning Board is to plan and zone. He is surprised that most residents want to keep the existing ordinance when so many are in violation of it. Something has to change. It is his belief that the City can do better in managing the storage of RV's than what is being done now. The ordinance was approved by a 100 percent consensus, 6 -0. Board members have heard resident input and changed their minds. There are two concerns for the City. The first is storage of RV's. He finds it abhorrent that summer vehicles are not put away but piled in yards to be stored on personal property during the winter. The City can do better in that respect. The Planning & Zoning Board deals with many issues that center on beliefs as to how the City should be run. Judgments have to be made that are not based on emotion or friendship but based on the best facts available. He would like to see an ordinance that recognizes the storage problem for RV's in residential areas. Mr. Paul Trolley, 945 Evergreen Trail, stated that the example used of an urban sized lot is a new phenomena in the City. He has 2.5 acres with a 75 -foot driveway that is three cars wide. He believes that he should be able to park whatever he wishes at anytime in his own driveway. He further stated that in planning to build a garage, he found that he would have to pay a $350 planning fee as well as the building permit fee. These costs plus the electrical work for the garage are more than the garage he wanted to build which was only $1,000. Fees are prohibitive and should be addressed. If the ordinance is going to be changed, he would like the City to consider those who have a larger lot than the common urban lot shown in the example. Mr. Ron Hedberg, 899 Lois Lane, stated that possible compromises to consider would be: 1) to restrict RV stays of more than three nights; 2) discourage parking in front yards with a parking permit process giving homeowners the choice of moving RV's to the back or side yard or finding suitable storage; 3) by paying for a parking permit, homeowners would pay for the convenience of parking on their property. He would suggest a parking permit fee in the $100 range, so that it will be high enough to encourage people to move their RV's. Mr. Jerry Clausen, 6109 Baldwin Lake Road, stated that he has enough property for visitors to stay a week in an RV. People do not have to look in his yard, and as fast as they are driving, they should keep their eyes on the road. He noted • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 7 that his house is 45 years old and the property value is going up by $2,000 and $3,000 per year. With the number of RV's in the City, he would like to see the whole ordinance changed to at least allow residents to store these vehicles on their own property. There should be no restrictions as long as these vehicles are not hurting anyone. Mr. Paul Stewart, 7092 Snow Owl Circle, stated that he lives on a cul -de -sac with a narrow front lot. The only place to put his RV is in the driveway. If the City holds to the restrictions in the present ordinance, he would not be able to have a camper. That is too restrictive. He agreed that positive changes should be made to the ordinance. Mr. Richard Roth, 6550 Blackduck Drive South, asked when the ordinance was initially put in place. Chair Schaps answered, 1978. He added that City ordinances have been under review for the past 2.5 years in order to reorganize them and put them in a more usable form. Mr. Roth stated that he has a boat and utility trailer. One is stored in the garage and the other is stored along side the garage, and he has put in landscaping to shield them from the road. He has received no complaints from neighbors, nor has he complained about his neighbors' vehicles. He has never seen anything that would prompt the restrictive ordinance that currently exists or an even more restrictive one as proposed. He would like to see a new ordinance without any restrictions. Mr. Robert Bening, 6788 East Shadow Lake Drive, stated that he initiated the original petition asking for tighter controls. A year and a half ago there was an empty lot across the street where a home was built with a 4 -car garage. All vehicles were kept in the garages. When the property was sold, the new owners had many more vehicles, boats, etc. He objects to these items being stored in the front and not used. These storage areas become collection points for tire rims, etc. Besides the aesthetics, there is a safety factor. An RV parked near a curve in the road can obstruct the view of traffic. Storage in front yards is also an invitation to robbery which has occurred on Shadow Lake Drive. He does not want to deny people the opportunity to use RV's, but he does not believe they should be stored in the front yard. The ordinance could be revised to address residential areas but not rural areas. Restrictions for exterior property use is not new. There are already regulations on accessory buildings, pole barns, houseboats, fishing boats, noise, smoke, dust, sewage disposal, etc. He expressed his appreciation to the Board for the proposed revision to the ordinance because storage of RV's is inappropriate in the front yard. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 8 Mr. Joe Teal, 6522 White Deer Trail, stated that he only heard about this issue because one resident took the initiative to distribute flyers. He would like to know why the City does not notify residents so there can be more input. Chair Schaps explained that approximately 2.5 years ago the City Council directed the Planning & Zoning Board to review the City's ordinances to make them more user friendly. No specific direction was given for any specific ordinance. The Board thoroughly reviewed over 300 pages of ordinances at additional workshop meetings to develop a book that is easier to read and use. When this ordinance was reviewed last fall, the entire ordinance was under review, not this specific topic. The entire book was made available to anyone who wished to read it. City notices and public hearings are published in The Quad. It is possible this ordinance was not as closely scrutinized as it should have been, and for that he apologized. However, he stated that he does not apologize for the vigilance that the Board has given to the ordinance review process. The Board has done a good job and produced a better City ordinance. Mr. Herr noted that The Quad put in an additional notice under the "News Briefs" for this meeting. He stated that many people do not read public notices and he appreciated seeing this additional notice where people would be likely to see it. He suggested considering a review of the ordinance drafting policy that would include the official public notice required as well as an additional notice under "News Briefs" where residents are likely to see it. Mr. Pat Smith, 6922 West Shadow Lake Drive, stated that the City of Vadnais Heights has a similar ordinance that requires RV's to be enclosed. When two neighbors got into a dispute, one turned the other in for not having his motor home enclosed. The second neighbor not only turned in the first neighbor for not having his pool enclosed but 45 other neighbors that were in violation of the ordinance. The City Council was put in the position of enforcing the ordinance on all violations. A restrictive ordinance is an ugly weapon, and he would not like to see such situations develop in Lino Lakes. Mr. Richard Jensen, 737 Caribou Circle, stated that he would like to see the ordinance apply only to RV's, not snowmobiles and boats. Mr. Carl Elmquist, 6310 Otter Lake Road, stated that it is important for people to get together when ordinances are reviewed. Otherwise, it will cost residents money. He noted an example from Arden Hills where there is an ordinance prohibiting property owners' or visitors' cars from being parked in the street in front of homes after 11:00 p.m. Violators are ticketed. Mr. Paul Brand expressed his concern about excessive government regulations and lost freedoms to residents. This discussion is already considering a second ordinance change. There could be a third, fourth and fifth change. Eventually the City will want everything out of the yard so that all homes look like Leave It • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 9 To Beaver. Residents work hard for their money, and he wants to be able to store his things in his yard and not have to pay for outside storage. Mr. David Raider, 6442 Ware Road, stated that outside storage Tots are not the most beautiful type of development to attract to the City. In fact, one was turned down because of aesthetics. They also attract birds and mice that damage goods that are stored. Many motor homes approach the value of people's permanent home. He does not want his put in a lot where he cannot see it. He wants it on his own property, which is at the heart of home ownership. He has voted for the schools and everything the City has asked for until this issue. If this ordinance is passed, he will consider moving to another community where he can keep his snowmobile and trailer on his own property. Mr. Brad Lindgren, 388 Thomas Street, stated that he lives on a corner lot and is in compliance with the present ordinance. He would also be in compliance with the proposed new ordinance but would have to drive to the back half of his property to store his vehicle. It would still be seen from the street. He requested the Board, when drafting the new ordinance, to please consider property owners with corner lots. There are many of them, and they have additional special problems to be in compliance. Mr. Mike Toffoli, 6865 Blackduck Drive, stated that he is currently in compliance with the ordinance but would have no way to put his RV in the back yard. It is used year round for his family, and he does not believe he should have to stored at a place required by the City because it is not harming one. Mr. John Verone, of Lake Drive, asked if the Board has researched neighboring cities on how this issue is handled. He noted that Coon Rapids, a much bigger City with more population, tried to pass a similar ordinance which almost caused a fight. Although many people are not as fortunate as he is to have a lot of property, he does not believe they should be denied privileges that he has. Every time he turns around rights are being taken away. Ms. Monica Slayton, 6283 Maple Lane, stated that there is no problem in her neighborhood, and this ordinance is an infringement on what she can do on her own property. She also expressed frustration at not being informed. She did not receive a flyer. If there is another public hearing, she would like to know how she can be informed of it including the options that will be discussed. Chair Schaps stated that the process to review this specific ordinance will take more than one meeting. An effort will be made to make the current ordinance available as well as the revised ordinance noting all revisions. No one from the City participated in distributing flyers. They were distributed by a private party. IIMr. Brand stated that there is a communication problem and minimal language used in The Quad that does not explain the issue. This issue was passed by the Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 10 Planning & Zoning Board and he only found out about it three days before the Council was to consider it. If he had not found out about it, the revised ordinance would be law. He expressed his frustration that this could have been voted into law with no one knowing. Such action undermines the trust of citizens in Lino Lakes. The information that was put in the "News Brief" regarding this meeting is the kind of communication tool residents would like to have. The public notices do not give enough information. Mr. Jeff Jergens, of Lantem Lane, stated that in reading the ordinance he is unclear as to the number of vehicles residents can have on their property. The way the ordinance reads it seems that there can only be one vehicle. He would like to store all his vehicles on his own property and would like the number clarified and whether it includes vehicles stored in his shed, garage, front yard or side yard. One resident stated that his children play in the back yard, and he does not want to store RV's there for them to climb on. The RV's should be stored in front where they can be used and the back yard left for children's play. Mr. Jim Spetzman, 8121 Lake Drive, stated that there is a lot of area in Lino Lakes with septic systems. Nothing can be parked on a septic system, nor is it possible to drive over drain fields. Requiring RV's to be parked in back would make it very difficult to get to them. Mr. Joe Plaisance, 8298 Lake Drive, suggested that neighborhoods establish covenants that would keep neighbors satisfied on these issues. Mr. Gordon Carrier, 7125 Rice Lake Lane, stated that the City took away the right to build a larger garage. Now he is being told to find a place to put his RV in his yard where there is a septic system. He would like to keep the rights that he has now with no changes. Mr. Pat Smith, 6922 West Shadow Lake Drive, stated that they do not keep their motor home in front because it is ugly. They park it on an empty lake lot. He has been turned in but never tagged and would like to know if he is in violation of the ordinance. Mr. Robinson stated that after reviewing and clarifying all City ordinances, they were presented to the City Council. Not just the RV ordinance was presented. He did not realize this ordinance was so restrictive, and he would favor continuing this public hearing until an ordinance is developed that the majority of people can live with. Mr. Brixius summarized the issues to be addressed in further review: 1) front yard storage; 2) differentiation between rural and urban lots; 3) definition of the types of vehicles covered in the ordinance. • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 11 Ms. Dahl stated that in response to the calls she received, she checked every city in the metro area with regard to RV regulation. She came to the conclusion that there are six cities with no ordinance. She also called the Police Department to find out how many complaints have been reported. In the past five years, there have been only three complaints which were quickly resolved. One resident asked if they should all attend future meetings or if the message was received by the large attendance at this meeting. Chair Schaps agreed that a strong message has been given by Lino Lakes citizens. It is the choice of citizens whether to attend future meetings. Requests have been made, and if citizens are interested, they should attend. Board members are volunteers to hear all comments and take telephone calls. One resident noted that many citizens attended to oppose the measure regarding garbage, and it passed. Chair Schaps stated that every caller who called him about RV's also brought up the garbage issue. However, the Planning & Zoning Board is not the forum to address the garbage issue. It is a Council issue. When there is as much interest over an issue as has been shown, he would expect that there would be a database to justify a change in the ordinance. There have been three complaints in five years in the City. That illustrates that a change may not be necessary, or perhaps only a setback change. Everyone in Lino Lakes is a good neighbor, and he would like to see that continue. Mr. Brixius suggested the RV ordinance be tabled until June in order for staff to develop language changes and get the ordinance published, so that citizens can see the proposed revisions. Procedurally, the public hearing would have to be continued through May to June. One resident stated that he called the City to see if he could keep his motor home in his driveway. He was told it is okay. Upon reading the ordinance and talking to the existing Mayor, he followed up and wrote a letter to the City but received no response. Now he finds out that he cannot park it in his driveway. This means that the City was not doing anything to enforce the ordinance. Also, not all affected people are present. If this issue is so contested, he would like to see it put on a ballot for a vote. This is an important issue for everyone. Also, if there is a complaint against him, he would like to be able to find out who made the complaint. Chair Schaps stated that confidentiality of the names of complainants is not covered by City ordinance but by state law. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 12 Ms. Dahl added that when she called the Police Department, she was told that they would only tell her the number of complaints and approximate location, no specific addresses. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to continue the public hearing to the May meeting as a matter of procedure, so that the public hearing can be continued to the June meeting for a decision; and that any document formulated by staff will be made available for citizens to read. The MOTION was supported by Mr. Dunn. The motion carried, 6 -0. Chair Schaps called a break at 8:20 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:32 p.m. B. CB Commercial /US West, 6217 Centerville Road, Conditional Use Permit for Monopole and Base Station, PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Brixius stated that staff is recommending that the public hearing be continued to the May meeting in order to allow the City Council to consider a moratorium on monopole towers for telecommunications technology. Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 8:34 p.m. Mr. Herr made a MOTION to continue the public hearing for a Conditional Use Permit for a monopole and base station for CB Commercial /US West to the May meeting, and was supported by Mr. Dunn. The motion carried, 6 -0. C. Behm's Century Farms, Revised Preliminary Plat for 2nd Addition - PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Brixius stated that the proposal is for a minor change to the preliminary plat on the western boundary of Behm Century Farms. The 2nd Addition is being modified from 42 Tots to 49 lots for single family home development on a cul -de- sac. The proposal is consistent with the previously approved subdivision. Lot sizes conform to R -1 standards except Lot 4. Modifications will be made for minimum requirements to be met with setbacks and easements identified. The proposed streets comply with City requirements. Wetland mitigation is subject to approval by the City Engineer and the Rice Creek Watershed District. The major issue with this proposal is submission and approval for the extension of MUSA to this portion of Behm Century Farms. Without Metropolitan Council approval for MUSA expansion, the development cannot occur. Mr. Brixius stated that staff is recommending approval with the conditions stated in the staff report. Condition No. 3 can be deleted as it is no longer needed with the modification adjustments to the lot lines. Chair Schaps asked the status of the MUSA expansion approval. Mr. Gary Uhde stated that a recent meeting with Mr. Dick Thompson of the Metropolitan Council was positive. The project attorney, Mr. Coyle, is confident • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 13 that the process for MUSA approval will be completed within 60 days. This proposal will bring the amended subdivision into the same time frame as the other approved 42 lots. No homes will be built until MUSA is in place. Chair Schaps asked if more property has been acquired. Mr. Uhde answered, yes. Mr. Robinson expressed concern for the setback of the home on Lot 4 given the existing wetland. Mr. Johnson, Project Architect, illustrated the configuration of the proposed home on Lot 4 that will have little, if any, encroachment on existing wetland. Mr. Dunn asked the status of a traffic signal on I -35W. Mr. Ahrens stated that a meeting will be scheduled with the County to discuss the issue in detail. A meeting with state officials also must be scheduled because the bridge is under the jurisdiction of the state. Mr. Uhde noted that a contingency of MUSA approval is the installation of the traffic signal. Mr. Gelbmann noted that at the February meeting the Board placed a condition of approval to restrict further subdivision until MUSA is approved. He asked what safeguards are in place to insure that until MUSA is expanded development cannot occur. Mr. Brixius stated that the lot configuration for the subdivision is being restated. MUSA is still a condition of this subdivision approval. Mr. Uhde added that the final plat cannot be approved and a building permit issued until MUSA expansion is approved. Mr. Gelbmann referred to condition No. 4 and asked if the City has a street naming plan in place. Ms. Wyland stated that street names are not by number or alphabet. In the past few years names that have historic value to the plat or people who live in the area have been used. Mr. Johnson stated because of the proximity to Appaloosa Lane, the developer would like to name the cul -de -sac Appaloosa Court. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:50 p.m. and was supported by Mr. Gelbmann. The motion carried, 6 -0. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 14 Chair Schaps asked if a park will be built in the area. Mr. Johnson stated that the City owns a big park to the west that will service this development. At this time the City has requested cash for a park dedication rather than land. Mr. Herr made a MOTION to approve the proposed preliminary plat for Behm's Century Farm 2nd Addition to include the additional 7 lots with the following conditions: 1. Submission and subsequent approval of the MUSA expansion, which includes the subject property, from the Metropolitan Council. 2. Roadway construction plans must be submitted. Said plans are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 3. The proposed cul -de -sac is named in accordance with the City's street naming plan. 4. Drainage and utility easements are provided along all lot lines and placed over designated wetland areas. This item should be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 5. The submitted utility plan shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 6. A grading and drainage plan shall be submitted. Said plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 7. A wetland mitigation plan is submitted subject to approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District and the City Engineer. 8. All park dedication requirements as determined by the City Park Board are satisfactorily met. 9. Comments of other City Staff. The motion carried, 6 -0. D. Pheasant Hills 8th Addition, MUSA Expansion, PUBLIC HEARING Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 8:51 p.m. Ms. Wyland stated that the Pheasant Hills development was approved by the City in August, 1990, with MUSA availability to the entire development except the northwest portion of the site planned to be the last phase of development. In • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 15 July, 1996, Mr. Vaughan received 9.44 net acres of Interim MUSA Reserve for a portion of Phase 7. He would now like to complete Phase 8 and needs an additional 16.7 net acres of Interim MUSA Reserve. The City has adopted 12 criteria to be used for applications of Interim MUSA Reserve. This development does meet the criteria, and staff would recommend approval of the allocation of 16.7 net acres of Interim MUSA Reserve to Pheasant Hills No. 8. Mr. Dunn asked if Phase 8 completes the development. Ms. Wyland responded that there will be two or three more phases. The balance of the site is within MUSA. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:55 p.m. and was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion carried, 6 -0. Mr. Robinson asked Mr. Vaughan's plans for the island. Mr. Vaughan stated that he plans to build a house on it. He is presently working with the Regional Waters Manager of the DNR on access. Mr. Herr asked if the plat is part of the previous plat approval except to address the MUSA issue. Ms. Wyland answered, yes. A final plat will have to be submitted to the City Council for approval. The permits are in place, and everything is consistent with what was previously approved. Mr. Dunn asked if the current R -1 X zoning would potentially be changed. Ms. Wyland stated that no zoning change is planned for the area. Chair Schaps asked the percentage of Tots that have been sold. Mr. Vaughan stated that approximately 60 percent of the lots have been sold. Mr. Wessel noted that the wetland to the north of these sites is part of the City's land exchange program with the County for the new village and town center. Mr. Vaughan has been very cooperative with these arrangements. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to approve allocation of 16.7 net (25.0 gross) acres of Interim MUSA Reserve to Pheasant Hills No. 8, and was supported by Mr. Robinson. The motion carried, 6 -0. E. GNW Machine, XXX Cedar Street, Site Plan Review & Minor Subdivision Ms. Wyland stated that GNW has submitted a site plan and a minor subdivision to facilitate a 40,000 square foot office /warehouse with a 12,000 square foot Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 16 expansion area. The property is located on the north side of Cedar Street, north of the entrance to Clearwater Creek residential development. Sewer and water utilities will be extended to this area with the reconstruction of Cedar that is planned for early summer. The property consists of 4.19 acres to be split off from a larger parcel and is zoned Light Industrial consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The zoning ordinance requires a 50 -foot setback from Cedar Street. GNW Machine manufactures high tolerance parts. The company was started in 1979, and has three sites in White Bear Lake, Coon Rapids and North St. Paul. These sites will be consolidated into the new location. The exterior of the building will be rock face concrete block with colored accents. The color has yet to be determined. The building height and green space are in compliance with the zoning ordinance. Off - street parking will be provided for 118 vehicles which is in excess of the ordinance requirements. In accordance with ADA requirements, the City has requested five handicapped spaces and one van access space. Access is off Cedar Street and is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Ms. Wyland stated that the applicant has been asked to increase the landscaping along Cedar Street to provide a more effective screen for the residents to the south from the headlights in the parking area. The revised landscaping plan shall be reviewed by the City Forester and CPTED Officer. A detailed lighting plan must also be submitted and reviewed by the CPTED Officer prior to the issuance of a building permit. The trash area will be enclosed with a 7 -foot wall to blend in with the exterior of the structure. Signage is in compliance with the City's sign ordinance. Rooftop ventilating equipment is to be screened or blended with the building. All utilities will be reviewed and subject to approval by the City Engineer. A park dedication fee will be required to meet subdivision requirements. Ms. Wyland explained that the minor subdivision of 4.19 acres from a larger parcel creates a new parcel of 458 feet in width and 450 feet in depth. The parcel meets minimum requirements for the zoning district. Staff does recommend approval. Mr. Jim Walstrom, CEO, GNW Machine, stated that the company makes precision parts for other companies in the Twin City area. The company will consolidate into one location except for the Coon Rapids office. Chair Schaps asked if the conditions of approval are acceptable, as he would like to be sure they are understood and do not create confusion at a later time. Mr. Gary Nordness, Developing Consultant, commended staff and everyone who has worked with them. It is a fast track project. They are aware of the conditions placed upon the project, and he believes it is a question of defining particular issues that can be worked out with staff. • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 17 Mr. Gelbmann asked what noise factor will be generated by the manufacturing processes of GNW Machine, such as a large air compressor. Mr. Walstrom stated that the shop is a quiet operation, mostly light manufacturing. There are no large presses. It is mostly computer operated equipment. The air compressor is in a fully enclosed area. Mr. Gelbmann expressed concern about lighting reflecting into the neighborhood to the south. He would like to see restrictions in place to keep lighting on the site and not reflected off-site. Mr. Nordness stated that the casted dowel lighting will be directed onto the parking lot, not off it. Mr. Gelbmann stated that this will be a good development for Lino Lakes and expressed his appreciation to GNW for choosing a site in the City. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to approve the site plan with the stated conditions, and was supported by Mr. Robinson: 1. Proper building permits must be obtained prior to any construction on the site. The building permit shall include a deposit of 1% of construction costs to insure completion of all site improvements. 2. The applicant shall sign a development agreement and post financial guarantees as specified by the City prior to issuance of the building permit. 3. The City Engineer shall review and approve the grading, utility and drainage plans. 4. Roof top heating and ventilating units shall be screened and /or blended with the design and coloring of the building. 5. The parking area shall be supplied with adequate handicapped spaces as provided by the ADA Rules and Regulations. 6. Permits shall be obtained from the RCWD for grading and on -site ponding, if required. 7. Signage shall comply with the City Sign Ordinance and proper permits obtained. • 8. The Developer shall participate in the reconstruction of Cedar Street at a cost to be determined by the City Engineer. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 18 9. A park dedication fee shall be collected as outlined by the Subdivision Ordinance. 10. Concrete curb, gutter and bituminous paving shall be provided for all access driveways and parking areas. 11. The site plan shall reflect a minimum 50 -foot setback from Cedar Street and the landscaping plan shall be enhanced along Cedar Street as determined by the City Forester with particular attention to screening headlights from the residential district to the south. 12. Low cut -off lights shall be used in the parking lot. Lights in the parking lot and on the wall pack of the building shall be directed downward to prevent reflection into neighboring residential areas. The motion carried, 6 -0. Mr. Herr made a MOTION to recommend approval of the minor subdivision, as submitted and was supported by Mr. Gelbmann. The motion carried, 6 -0. F. Fogarty V, XXX Apollo Drive, Site Plan Review and Minor Subdivision Mr. Brixius stated that at the last meeting the Board approved the Fogarty development south of Apollo Drive. The proposed minor subdivision is a 1.63 acre parcel from Outlot B of the Lino Lakes Industrial Park for a five -unit industrial condominium building. The zoning of the area as General Industrial (GI) is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and this proposed use. Adjacent areas are also zoned GI. No park dedication fee is required, as it was paid when the Apollo Business Park was originally platted. Access will be provided at a shared driveway easement, and the applicant is being required to enter into an access agreement for maintenance. The proposed site plan meets all ordinance requirements with the exception of the parking area encroachment into the public right -of -way. The applicant will be required to provide the minimum 15 -foot setback. There is sufficient depth to the lot for the building to be shifted. Chair Schaps asked if the applicant has agreed to make that shift. Mr. Fogarty stated that would not be a problem. Mr. Brixius stated that the parking spaces must be 9 feet wide with provision of three handicapped spaces to meet ADA requirements. Only two are shown. Parking provisions exceed requirements so there is sufficient space for the required adjustments. Additional landscaping is requested in the rear for screening from l -35W, and additional plantings are needed in front in the 15 -foot setback area. No irrigation system is planned, and he. suggested that the Landscaping Plan be revised. • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 19 Mr. Brixius stated that detailed elevation plans have not yet been provided by the architect and are subject to review by the City Council. Also a lighting plan will be required to be sure there is no glare on the public right -of -way. Signage is in compliance with City code. Approval is recommended with the listed conditions in the staff report. Mr. Dick Gilbert stated that he is working with Mr. Fogarty on the design of the buildings. All of the buildings have the same theme and are of rock face with decorative patterns on all four sides. The developer will comply with the landscaping recommendations. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION, Ms. Dahl seconded to approve the site plan submitted for F. Fogarty V with the following conditions: 1. A revised site plan be submitted to address the following parking related issues: a. A minimum 15 -foot setback of all parking areas and drive isles shall be provided from the public right -of -way. b. All proposed parking stalls shall have a minimum 9 -foot width. c. A minimum of three (3) parking stalls shall be designated for disability use. 2, The applicant shall enter into an access agreement with the property owner to the north. 3. All tenants of the proposed structure shall utilize the trash facilities within the trash enclosure structures or shall provide independent trash storage areas within the structure. 4. The architectural appearance and materials of the proposed buildings shall be subject to the review and approval of the City's CPTED Officer and the City Council. 5. The submitted landscape plan shall be revised to address the following issues, subject to review and approval of the City Forester and the City's CPTED Officer. a. Provide additional plantings along the front property line adjacent to the 4th Avenue /Apollo Drive intersection. b. No plantings shall be located within the public right -of -way. c. Provide substantial additional plantings at the rear of the property to screen loading areas from view from Interstate 35W. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 20 6. A photometric lighting plan shall be submitted if any exterior lighting is to be utilized. Said lighting plan shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 7. Any and all site signage shall be subject to review and approval of the City Staff. 8. All site grading, drainage and utilities shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 9. The applicant shall be required to enter into a development contract with the City. 10. Comments of other City Staff. The motion carried, 6 -0. Mr. Gelbmann made a MOTION to approve the 1.63 acre subdivision on Apollo Drive from Outlot B of the Lino Lakes Industrial Park as submitted by Fogarty V, and was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion carried, 6 -0. Ms. Wyland requested that item I. be considered next due to the lateness of the hour and the parties who have been waiting. I. 850 Orange Street - Variance Ms. Wyland stated that the variance request is to construct a new entrance into the home at 850 Orange Street for wheelchair access. The septic system is located in the front yard, and state law requires a 10 -foot setback of any building from a septic tank. The proposed construction would be approximately 7 feet from the septic tank. The Building Inspector has indicated that the new entrance would not cause adverse effects on the septic system and that the tank can be maintained. State law allows variances from the 10 -foot setback if the City determines a need. A variance of 3 feet is requested to allow the revised entrance to be built. Staff is recommending approval. Mr. Dunn asked if the structure would be permanent. Mr. Roger Sharon stated that the structure will be a permanent wood ramp and entryway, but it could be removed if the property were sold. Mr. Gelbmann asked if cross footings will be needed. Mr. Sharon answered, yes. • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 21 Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to approve a variance of 3 feet to allow a wheelchair entrance access to be built 7 feet from the septic system at 850 Orange Street. He was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion carried, 6 -0. G. Comprehensive Plan, Districts I and II, PUBLIC HEARING Chair Schaps declared the hearing open at 9:30 p.m. Mr. Brixius stated that the proposed update to the Comprehensive Plan is part of the metropolitan regional planning mandate to be completed by 1998. It is not anticipated that the entire plan will be done for another year. However, specific attention to Districts I and II is needed for the development of the new village and town center. The study area for planning District I is bounded by the I- 35W /Highway 23 interchange, 4th Avenue, 77th Street and the regional park. This area has historically been identified as the potential economic development area for commercial and industrial development. The primary issue in this area relates to transportation, such as access to I -35W, the capacity needed for the future and a future traffic signal at I -35W and Highway 23. It is anticipated that Highway 23 will become a major thoroughfare through the community. The land uses under review reflect existing land uses with some modifications. The area is currently zoned rural /single family residential. With the expansion of Apollo Industrial Park, it is anticipated that medium to high density residential will be appropriate. The northeast quadrant is shown to continue with commercial zoning as it currently exists. The land use designation for the southwest corner is light industrial with controlled access points onto Highway 23. The most unique area is the southeast quadrant where the town center is intended to be located, and a variety of land uses are needed -- commercial development will provide the village feeling; medium density residential is shown on the eastern border; the existing single family residential will be maintained on Marshan Lane and to the south. Mr. Brixius stated that District II contains the Highway 49 corridor area, which is now Highway 23 with the transfer of jurisdiction from the state to the county. New development of the middle school has brought focus to transportation considerations in that area also. District II is bounded by I -35W on the north, the regional park on the east, the City of Circle Pines on the west and the regional park to the south. The transportation issues are related to the City's ability to establish convenient access points along Highway 23 for area residents. Redevelopment can only occur at the time sewer becomes available. The District land uses include existing sewered residential neighborhoods, medium density development, senior housing, public uses, such as churches and school as a transition from the freeway to residential areas. A limited commercial area is shown along Hodgson Road and Highway 23 that will be compatible with residential neighborhoods. The seaplane base raises two issues: 1) the question of what would be the appropriate land use in that vicinity, and 2) whether general business would be an appropriate land use with the residential area. A performance based land use area was established that would require Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 22 future development to be compatible with the residential character of the neighborhood. Mr. Brixius stated that the process to identify land uses for these two districts was initiated in August of 1996, and the task force and City committees have been receptive. Numerous public meetings have been held. This public hearing is to make a final recommendation to the Council for adoption. Mr. Wessel stated that with City Council approval, this plan will be submitted to the Metropolitan Council. The process has included as much public participation as has ever been done in the City with over 100 people directly involved over the past several months. Districts I and II as presented were unanimously approved by the Comprehensive Task Force Committee. Mr. Gelbmann made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 9:55 p.m. and was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion carried, 6 -0. Mr. Dunn stated that there remain a number of open issues where solutions are not defined, such as transportation. On page 7, paragraph 3, it states that the homes along 77th Street are zoned rural and permitted within the current zoning. This raises questions as to compatibility with the long range land use plan for the area. He further referred to page 12 reference to the land use relationship to single family residences north of 77th Street. Mr. Brixius explained that these are two different areas. The first reference is in the northwest quadrant currently zoned rural where there are a number of large unsewered lots that are used for residential use. Ultimately development south of 77th Street will not remain residential. As utilities become available, redevelopment into light industrial or commercial is anticipated. Therefore, ultimately the area would be rezoned for industrial uses. The area referred to on. page 12 is north of 77th Street, which is seen as an established neighborhood with smaller lots that deserve and need protection with a land use transition of medium density. Mr. Dunn asked if, with the approval of this amendment for Districts I and II, the Board is endorsing zoning changes for this area. Mr. Brixius answered, yes, that the Board would be making an ultimate decision on the future of the land use for this area. Mr. Herr asked if approving the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is setting the stage for changing the zoning later. Mr. Brixius stated that the Comprehensive Plan and zoning should be consistent. Ultimately the area will be rezoned to be consistent with this amendment. • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 23 • Mr. Dunn asked for clarification of paragraph 1, on page 8 regarding wetland delineation. Mr. Brixius stated that as part of the overall site evaluation, a number of wetland areas were identified. At the time development occurs, a wetland delineation will be required for compliance mitigation under the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act. Mr. Dunn noted that County Ditch No. 10 will be problematic and complicate local street patterns. Mr. Brixius stated that the amendment provides preservation of the ditch, so that if a street is put in, the plan must accommodate the ditch. Mr. Dunn referred to page 9 and noted that there is no overall transportation plan for Districts I and II. That issue will have to be addressed with each individual development plan. He referred to page 13 and asked if approval means approval of the content of the 98,400 square feet for the town center. Mr. Brixius responded that approval is for the five components that will make up the town center: professional center, commercial, public services, residential and parking. There will be a full range of uses, and this is a general description of them. It is not a commitment for space, and a disclaimer is included. • Mr. Dunn referred to page 19 and noted the commercial land use phased • rezoning to satisfy the land use designation. Mr. Herr asked if, where rezoning is likely, communication has taken place with land owners. Mr. Wessel stated that the plans have been thoroughly communicated with property owners. Neighborhood representatives from both Districts I and II were represented in the task force. Chair Schaps noted that Mr. Bruce Hanson attended every meeting, and he is the land owner with the biggest stake. Mr. Robinson referred to page 28, paragraph 8 which indicates a park area along the east shore of Rice Lake. It should state the west side of the lake. Mr. Brixius noted the correction. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Districts I and II as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan Task Force and was supported by Mr. Robinson. The motion carried, 6 -0. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 24 A. Highland Meadows - Rezoning and Preliminary Plat Mr. Brixius stated that a concept plan has been submitted for single family home development of 108 homes and 60 townhomes in the northwestern corner of the community along County Road 14 and Highway 23. The area consists of 54 acres within MUSA. Development of this area would be an opportunity to have utilities extended close to areas that need them. The concept plan is innovative with a combination of single family homes and townhomes connecting to single family development to the west and south. R -1 zoning also exists to the east and Tight industrial to the southeast. The current land use plan indicates single family development and is not consistent with the proposed medium density of townhomes. The curve design of the road is a positive element to reduce traffic speed. However, the access point would be the Highway 23/I -35W interchange southbound on 77th Street which could introduce a lot of additional traffic into low density residential areas. He recommended that a traffic study be done to show access and the impact to surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Gelbmann stated that townhome development may be more suitable to avoid orphan Tots. Mr. Brixius stated that while the northern portion is a dead end street, it is anticipated that it would be extended with future development. It would be his suggestion to obtain direct access to the main street with this development or withhold it until access is provided. His main concern is the length of the cul -de- sac which is in excess of 500 feet and would require a temporary variance for a long -term arrangement. Another access into the subdivision is needed. The street access to townhomes are proposed as private streets. City ordinance does not allow private streets to be established. Also, a PDO would be required to allow the narrowing width and variable setbacks on the curvilinear design of the street. There are a number of triangular shaped lots. His concern is what would remain of the lot for additions once the main structure is built. Mr. Brixius stated that the Board is being asked for feedback and support to change the Comprehensive Plan to include medium density in this area. Mr. Wessel noted that the timing of this discussion is particularly appropriate because on May 8, the Task Force will begin review of Districts 3, 4, 5, and 6. This area is located in District 3 which will be reviewed next. Chair Schaps asked what feedback has been given by neighbors. Mr. Ken Gust, Civil Engineer for the project, stated that a neighborhood meeting has not yet been scheduled. The purpose of submitting a concept plan is to let the City know that many of the issues raised can easily be addressed with the reorientation of the homes on the lots. The developer is in the process of obtaining feedback from the county with regard to access points on County Road 14. The project may be phased. • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 25 Chair Schaps asked the width of 79th Street. Mr. Robinson answered, 30 feet. Mr. Ahrens stated that 79th Street would be used for the utility extension. Mr. Dunn asked the timing for the development. Mr. Gust stated that when the City does the utility trunk extension, the plat will be finalized. Mr. Herr asked if this development is premature to consideration of the Comprehensive Plan for the area. Mr. Wessel stated that he believes the timing is right. Mr. Rick Harrison, Project Planner, demonstrated the reasoning for the curvilinear roadway with a display. Besides slowing speeds, at least 15 to 25 feet of linear road can be saved. It also increases the green space in front of homes allowing for more landscaping and a streetscape flavor. More open areas will be in front instead of in side yards, which are not generally used. The lots can be reconfigured to eliminate the triangle shape. The house pad is 50' x 50' with 70 -foot width Tots. Mr. Brixius expressed concern about curb cuts and the City's reluctance to use PDO's. Mr. Harrison stated that it would be critical to have a PDO because Minnesota law does not allow the setback line to be recorded on the plat. The only way the concept can be approved with the varied front setback is through a PDO that indicates the setback lines. Chair Schaps asked the size of the proposed homes Mr. Gust stated that they will vary. All of the Tots will be 10,800 square feet according to City standards. A benefit to the City is saving maintenance on the street with less plowing. The price range of the homes will be $120,000 to $150,000. Chair Schaps asked the lot price. Mr. Gust answered, approximately $30,000. Mr. Robinson stated that he likes the curved street but would not support a PDO. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 26 Mr. Dunn agreed and noted the population increase with this development would be approximately 500, or 5 percent of the current population for the City to absorb. This should be seriously evaluated as part of the Task Force review. He asked what school district would be used. Mr. Gust answered, Forest Lake. Mr. Brixius stated that if a PDO is not acceptable, a standardized subdivision can be pursued. If the concept is pleasing, he recommended pursuing the mechanism to get it. Mr. Dunn asked if, as part of the Economic Recovery Plan, the development would bring enough taxes to pay for utility services. Mr. Brixius stated that homes in the $140,000 to $150,000 price range are close to breaking even in generating revenues for utility services. Efforts are being made to finalize that policy as part of the Inventory Plan. Mr. Gelbmann stated that he likes the curved road but is concerned about the triangular lots with small back yards. There are lots with six sides. He would favor the idea of extending sewer services to the area with this development as a way to pay for it. Mr. Herr asked if the extension of the sewer trunk line is a City expenditure, as this project would be dependent on that extension. Mr. Ahrens responded that the feasibility study that was done last fall recommended alignment of the trunk line along Lake Drive. The extension would be a City expenditure, as it is a major trunk line that will service the northwestern part of the City. However, there would be assessments to the property owners of this proposed project as abutting properties, which would be a considerable contribution to the total cost. It would bring the sewer system closer to lots on Vicki Lane that are too small to have septic systems repaired. The City would schedule the trunk line extension in conjunction with this project. Mr. Brixius recommended that the developer meet with the neighborhood of single family homes to the east that would be adjacent to the proposed townhomes. Chair Schaps emphasized the importance of neighborhood meetings for residents to be informed and have the opportunity to ask questions. H. Sign Ordinance - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Herr made a MOTION to continue the public hearing for the sign ordinance to the May 1997 meeting and was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion carried, 6 -0. • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 1997 Page 27 • VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 11:10 p.m. and was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion carried, 6 -0. • •