Laserfiche WebLink
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 4, 2004 6 <br />The land to the east is being developed as a OP-Whistling Valley 2nd Addition which <br />features a sizeable outlot of Preserved Open Space abutting the eastern-most lots of <br />Whistling Valley (side yard of Lot 4, Block 5, and rear yards of Lot 1-3 Block 6, <br />Whistling Valley). <br />Bald Eagle Development has required a four-fifths OP variance to eliminate the 100 foot <br />east buffer of Whistling Valley since the approved design of Whistling Valley 2nd <br />Addition will result in no homes in proximity to those side/rear yards which will enable <br />additional flexibility as to house location on the 4 lots in Whistling Valley. <br />M/S/P DeLapp/Johnston – to adopt Resolution No. 2004-040, Approving an OP 4/5th <br />variance for Whistling Valley to eliminate the 100 foot buffer requirement on Lot 4, <br />Block 5; and Lots 1-3, Block 6. (Motion passed 4-0.) <br /> 10. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT: <br />Hill Trail Property <br />Council member Johnston explained a resident on Hill Trail, who received Council <br />approval for a variance to build a garage, has removed trees and vegetation. He noted the Building Official inspected the property on Sunday (5/2) and the silt fence was not <br />installed and still not installed as of this meeting. Johnston added that this resident told <br />council members that he would preserve the trees and vegetation. A submittal of a <br />landscape plan was not a condition of the variance approval because they took the <br />resident’s word. In order to prevent this situation from happening again, the Council said it would have to be very careful to add all conditions for approval. A landscape plan and <br />performance bond should be required. <br /> <br />Discussion on the process of variance performance will be added as an agenda item under <br />Planning, Land Use and Zoning for the May 18th Council agenda. Fence on Marquess <br />Attorney Filla reported he talked to Chad Simich who agreed to get a quote to bring the <br />segment on the street side into City compliance. Midwest Fence provided an estimate <br />which includes cost of replacing the existing 72” high fence section along the street (including the existing double drive gate) and full cost recovery for the 72” fence running <br />perpendicular from the street to the rear of the house which will be torn down. Mr. <br />Simich wanted to be assured that craftmanship and materials will be of consistent quality <br />and design standard with the rest of the fence. <br /> Council member Johnston said this is a shared responsibility on both sides and would be <br />amenable to pay up to half the cost of the fence replacement. Chad Simich responded a <br />simple telephone call from the City would have prevented this situation. He said the <br />design change he made to the fence was made because of the input of the City and that <br />this input affected not only him, but was repeated to his neighbor and the Homeowner’s Association. He said the Building Official visited his property and had walked the fence <br />line.