April 18, 2006 CCP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Excerpt Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 10, 2006 Preliminary Plat of BIDDEN MEADOWS OF LAKE ELMO Preliminary Plat Continued: HIDDEN MEADOWS OF LAKE ELMO The Planner explained this application was tabled after the Public Hearing was conducted on March 27, 2006. The City Engineer's Memo reflects a few items of concern and there remains the issue of increasing the vegetative screening buffer on the easterly boundary because it is reduced from 200 to 100 feet with the neighboring parcel being eligible for OP development in the future. An e-mail received from the Engineer this afternoon was distributed. M/S/P, Deziel/Lyzenga, to remove from the table. Vote: 8:0. Paul Danielson, Kimley-Horn Associates Mr. Danielson presented a slide show with photographs of the site and the church site. He presented his plans for landscaping within the buffer zones that showed the planting of six foot spruce trees at the edge of the tree line within the new backyards. He said the site is gently rolling and the area of the buffer is at the toe of a slope where it would be impractical to try to build a berm where there are already concerns for drainage due to the topography of the site. Mr. Dyer Mr. Dyer asked about access for his neighbor who is landlocked. That neighbor has an ingress and egress easement across his property. He said he has approached the applicants several times since 2004, not just three or four months ago. He was hoping that as a good neighbor, the applicants would provide access for the landlocked parcel as well as for him to subdivide. It would increase tax revenue and might help with density issues. The developer would be better served by doing it. He asked if it is incumbent upon the developer to think about the effect on neighboring parcels. He is not a fan of pocket developments. Church members have no other options to get out of the site toward Lake Elmo Avenue. He said our pocket developments are like Minnetonka. He asked if Minnetonka has had issues with that type of development or is it successful. The Planner said the City can and often has established street stubs. To what extent it is done is relative to policy. Minnetonka had few if any through streets in the 1960's and 1970's. It was successful in some cases and in others it created public safety problems. The City of Minnetonka corrected some of the problems at considerable expense. The Lake Elmo City Council's desires have been, during his tenure, to maintain pocket neighborhood communities with a tight grid of thoroughfares. The Planner questioned whether the existing tree line would be year round effective, and he has not been to the site to make that determination. Evergreen trees and the planting scheme would be fine under normal circumstances. Those new trees will essentially be in people's backyards and may not be maintained by the property owners. To screen the new houses might be impossible due to topography. Another option would be not to build two-story houses. The Planner explained that the original preliminary plat had a street stub to the south boundary as recommended by the Planning Commission but the City Council ordered it removed. A new plan for trail relocation was submitted to the City Engineer today.