Laserfiche WebLink
9. PLANNING, LAND USE & ZONING: <br />A. Minor Subdivision: Gust Kempf, 2685 Lake Elmo Avenue <br />Planner Dillerud reported the Planning Commission recommended approval <br />of this application to divide an existing 15+ acre parcel into 3 parcels; and to <br />concurrently consolidate two of those three parcels with two adjoining <br />existing parcels. The result is to increase the area of the two existing <br />adjacent parcels sufficient to move them from non -conforming in area to <br />conforming in area in the R-1 zoning district. <br />M/S/P DeLapp/Dunn — to adopt Resolution No. 2001-095, approving the <br />concurrent division/consolidation application of Kempf/Raleigh/Treml in <br />accordance with the graphic staff -dated October 4, 2001; and subject to the <br />conditions listed. (Motion passed 5-0). <br />B. Site & Building Plan Review: Neil & Susan Siverson <br />Planner Dillerud reported the Planning Commission recommended approval <br />of the Section 520 Site Plan for the Siverson Non-Ag Low Impact <br />Conditional Use Permit. The purpose of this review of the project is to <br />address issues such as site grading and drainage and apply the Section 520 <br />requirements regarding site landscaping security. The fact that a Non-Ag <br />Low Impact site is zoned AG precludes addressing issues of architectural <br />performance standards. <br />Planner Dillerud pointed out that the applicant proposes a modification <br />involving construction of two smaller storage structures in addition to the <br />larger structure along the west line of the CUP area. By that modification all <br />outside storage would be screened from the homes 200+ feet to the west of <br />the CUP area by structure, rather than landscaping. The landscaping <br />intended for the area now proposed to be occupied by the two smaller <br />structures has been moved to the west line of the overall site, to better <br />separate the driveway to the CUP area from homes in Cardinal Ridge <br />Council member DeLapp stated you were looking at a beautiful farm field <br />and now you look at a building which spoils everything. He would rather <br />see a use as OP consistent with the rest of the City. Council member <br />Armstrong stated this project leaves 96% of the land open. <br />LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 16, 2001 7 <br />