Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/11/1985 P&Z Agenda & MinutesAGENDA LINO LAKES PLANNING 6 ZONING September 11, 1985 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Consideration and Approval of Minutes - August 14, 1985 3. Open Mike 4. Building Official's Report 5. 7:15 Platting Ordinance - Zack Johnson 6. 7:30 Variance Setback Frontyard - El Rehbein 6 Son - 6498 Totem Trail 7. 8:00 Underground Road Policy 8. 8:15 Priority List Comp Plan Review 9. Old Business 10. New Business p2 7 11. Adjourn P1 ANN ; AND 7,0N 1': :', -ARD 1 3 5 Sept ember 11 , 1 5 Chairman McLean called to order the regular meeting of the Planning Iand Zoning Board at 7:10 P.M., Wednesday, September 11, 1985. Pre- sent: Doocy, Klaus, Ostlie. Absent: Prokop, Goldade, Cody. Mr. Kulaszewicz, Council Liaison; 1?r. Kluegel, Building Official; Mr. Marier, Council Member and Mrs. Foster, Secretary were also present. IMr. Kluegel also mentioned that the Park Board met on 9/9/85 and arranged a time to tour the City to examine the parks and also to begin their task of finding and acquiring property in the southeast corner of the City for park purposes. Mr. Kluegel extended the Park Board's invitation to the P 8 Z Board to join them on the tour and /or convey any suggestions as to possible park property in the southeast corner. The Board was also made aware of a vacancy on the Park Board., CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - August 14, 1985 Mrs. Klaus moved to approve the minutes of the 8/14/85 meeting of the P 8 Z Board as presented. Motion seconded by Mr. Doocy and carried. BUILDING OFFICIAL'S REPORT Mr. Kluegel reported the following actions taken by the City Council at their 8/26/85 meeting: - Public Hearing was set for the Roselyn VanElsberg preliminary plat for 8:00 P.M. on September 23, 1985 Public Hearing was set for Gary Uhde /GM Development request for a conditional use permit for land reclamation for 7:45 P.M. on September 23, 1985. - Three separate metes and bounds conveyances for Steve Bailey, Dorothy Kvitek, and Robert Knabe were approved per the P 6 Z's recommendations. EL REHBEIN 8 SONS - VARIANCE Mr. Jeff Joyer represented El Rehbein 8 Sons in their request for a variance to setback requirements on a County Road (Birch Street). This request was to build a house facing Totem Trail at the corner of Birch Street. The length of the particular house proposed would not fit on the assumed 100' frontage on Totem Trail which would cause the garage end of the house to be a 24' setback rather than the required 40' setback from Birch Street. Mr. Joyer pointed out the following reasons for planning the house on the lot as proposed: 1) for a lighter traffic pattern in front of the house, it should be set facing Totem Trail, 2) to limit Ithe noise of Birch Street, the garage should be on the north end of the home, 3) a precedent has been set by the other homes on Birch Street to allow less than a 40' setback, 4) topography and possible marginal land in the back yard would inhibit locating the house differently on the property, 5) the prospective buyer wants the house plan proposed and a different style house would not be as 136 marketable. PLANNING AND ZONING September 11, 1985 Page Two Mr. Kluegel pointed out that the property to the south experienced a problem with settling in theipast and that this property needs to be fully examined to determine its buildability. In further discussion of the request, the P & Z Board stated that the only point which Mr. Joyer made which may become a valid reason for approval would be the point with regard to a possible hardship caused by the topography of the lot. Mr. Joyer was told that soil borings from the property need to be presented in order to justify a variance in this case. Mrs. Klaus strongly suggested that El Rehbein & Sons use some creativity in designing a home for this lot which would satisfy all the setback requirements. A question was also raised with regard to the frontage of the lot. According to one of the maps presented, it appears that the frontage is somewhat less than the reported 100'. MOTION: Mr. Doocy moved to table consideration of the application from El Rehbein & Sons for a variance pending receipt of soil borings information and resolution of the lot line /frontage discrepancy. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PRESENTATION - SEWER EXTENSIONS Mr. Jim Barton, Metropolitan Council made a presentation, at the invitiation of the City, regarding among other things, the feasi- bility of extending sewers. It was felt that this information may be of interest to the P & Z Board at this time in preparation for review of the comprehensive plan for the City. The presentation involved all the aspects of costs of running the City (including police & fire service and City government, etc.), and the revenues collected by the City (through taxes, aid, etc.), and the impacts of these items on the feasibility of sewer extension. Mr. Barton explained the research study which the Metro Council put together for the City of Blaine to help that City determine their future sewer needs. The research study was a computerized method of visually displaying information in color. Mr. Barton felt that this method provides an easier comprehension of the data than the traditionally used tables and graphs, etc. The data used for this research study was obtained by the County, and Mr. Barton strongly suggested that the City pressure the County to distribute this very useful information which is compiled by the assessor's office for use in review of the comprehensive plan and also future economic development. Mr. Barton thanked the P & Z for the opportunity to make this presentation. 1 1 1 PLATTING ORDINANCE IAs requested at the P 8 Z's 8/14/85 meeting, Mr. Zack Johnson, the City Planner sent a memo dated 6/10/85 with regard to the platting ordinance. Mr. Johnson was unable to attend this meeting and the Board felt that any further discussion of the platting ordinance should be held off, until Mr. Johnson can contribute his opinion. MOTION: Mrs. Klaus moved to table further consideration of the platting ordinance until Mr. Zack Johnson is in attendance. Mr. Ostlie seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. PLANNING AND ZONING 1 37 September 11, 1985 Page Three UNDERGROUND ROAD POLICY This item was sparked at last month's P 8 Z meeting, where Mr. Goldade presented a proposed policy with respect to pushing cables, etc. under the street rather than cutting the street to install the cable. This subject has entered the spotlight recently with the installation of cable television in the City. The P 8 Z recommended that the Council take action to approve a specific 'policy with would eliminate cutting of streets. The Council requested that TKDA, the City engineering consultant, submit a letter explaining the current policy and any comments on the proposed policy._ (The policy proposed was made part of the 8/14/85 P 8_ Z minutes.) IThe P 8 Z Board felt that TKDA's response was not clear as to actual specifications and that they should submit .a policy type recommendation. Mr. Marier explained to the P 8 Z Board that there are situations, such as was the case recently with Group W Cable TV, where the decision to out the street rather than push the cable under the street was made because of multiple lines of cable being used. He explained that in situations where several cables or large diameter cables need to cross the street, pushing the cables under may create a void under the roadbed which would eventually cause a dip in the street equal toorgreater than the cutting of the street would create. For this reason, he felt that there should be a policy for underground road work which would have a provision to allow the engineer to use discretion in deciding which option would be least damaging to the street. The Board felt that TKDA did not address this subject completely or clearly and further recommendations would need to be submitted. MOTION: Mr. Ostlie moved to return the proposed draft for under- ground crossing of roadbeds by utilities for more complete defini- tion of what would be required within the MnDOT application or Iinclude MnDOT specifications and return with a suitable detailed policy statement. Mrs. Klaus seconded the motion which carried unanimously. The Board also felt that Mr. Goldade should be in attendance when finalizing a policy since he is most learned in this subject. 138 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW /BUDGET At last month's meeting the Board and Mr. Zack Johnson discussed the priorities in the comprehensive plan review and the estimated planning costs of each. The City Council received the priority list at their 8/26/85 meeting and Mr. Johnson, in a memo dated 9/10/85, gave more specific explanations for the tasks required. Chairman McLean stated that the 1986 budget for P & Z should include $8,200 which would be for planning service fees for A) reviewing zoning densities $1,700 - $2,200, B) updating road plan $1,900 - $2,300, C) updating utilities plan - TKDA input required, and D) comprehensive plan update $1,500 - $1,900. This $8,200 figure is the total of the maximum charge for each item. Mr. Schumacher reminded the Board that this type of endeavor never turns out to go as smoothly as hoped and that generally cost esti- mates are exceeded. To allow for this situation, the Board needs to consider a reasonable amount above and beyond the planning estimates. He also noted that Mr. Johnson's explanations for the tasks to be completed may prove to be inadequate. The Board also questioned whether or not Mr. Johnson was aware that he would be required to attend public hearings or other special meetings. Considering these possible additions to the planning fee estimates, the Board decided that approximately $15,000 should be budgeted for the comprehensive plan review in 1986. Mr. Schumacher was asked to confer with Mr. Johnson to insure that he and the City have like expectations with regard to attending meetings, the ex- tent to which zoning densities will be reviewed and other 'house- keeping' costs. Mr. Johnson should be made aware also that the compre- hensive plan review will include one additional P & Z meeting per month, public hearings, etc. as required. Should Mr. Schumacher find that this figure of $15,000 for the 1986 budget needs adjust- ment, he can make the adjustment based on discussions with Mr. Johnson. PLANNING AND ZONING September 11, 1985 Page Four The item within Mr. Johnson's priority list which points out the cost estimate to update the park plan should be handled by the Park Board in their 1986 budget and is not included within the P & Z's plans. The Board also mentioned that when the comprehensive plan review gets underway, the'Economic Development Committee and the community and other City Boards will be invited to contribute input. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS A joint meeting of the Shoreview Council and the City of Lino Lakes has been arranged for September 30, 1985 at 7iQQ P.M. Members from the City Boards and the community are welcome to attend. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M. Aye.