06-07-88 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 7, 1988 PAGE 10 the Citv. For the purpose of clarity, Graves felt it should be defined under hardsurface coverage what constituted hard surface --a tennis court or a swimming pool? Under Special Conditions, we now allow under R1 zoning 1000 sq.ft. accessory structures. Graves felt 500 sq.ft. was too restrictive and thought it would be unreasonable with 2 1/2 acres to have the requirements up to 1000 sq.ft.. Mr. Engstrom stated he had a covenant for an accessory structure 720 sq.ft. on smaller lots. Grave also brought up his concern on the 22' wide roads. The City has been very ,adamant in requiring all subdivision of Lake Elmo to have a 24' paved road width. He would prefer this to continue. In regard to a gravel road, he felt over a short period of time the City would get petitions to have the road black -topped. DeLapp responded the PZ was trying to make this economically viable enough so a developer can come in with an RE development. Engstrom stated that two-12 foot lanes would take care of most residential areas. In an ordinary subdivision of 2 1/2 acre lots, he thought we should want city standard type streets with a bituminous surface. Graves felt it should be stipulated that on a 5 acre subdivision gravel roads would be on a cul-de-sac and deemed private so the Citv is not required to maintain them. In regard to the statement that newlv developed property must adopt covenants at least as restrictive as in adjacent subdivision, DeLapp explained that if the subdivision would ao against FoxFire. thev would have to start out with FoxFire covenants. Al Kunde added that this would only be on adiacent lots to that subdivision --that being across the street is no longer considered adiacent. DeLapp also explained that in the Comp Plan it would require that anv 5 acre lot next to Rl zoning would not be eligible to have a horse. Graves thought this should be out in the ordinance and not in the Comp Plan. Councilman Graves thought the RE zoning District was a good wav to maintain and Dromegate the character of the Citv. He supported the concept. Councilman Moe was not against the concept, but questioned how was the Citv goinq to enforce the landscape conditions. DeLapp answered the enforcement would be through the submitted landscape plan which the builder would submit. It would be the responsibility of the Buildina Inspector to approve it and check on the trees and shrubs. Moe asked the Citv Attornev if these special conditions have to be applied city-wide. Knaak answered that this would be defined in the particular zonina district and would onlv affect that area. The no clear -cutting provision was discussed. Lee Hunt felt it would be a real travesty to come in and clear a lot bare without leaving some trees up and having some form of management. Ed Stevens explained that clear cutting to him meant to cut everything down and replace it with nothing. This wouldn't be acceptable. The builder could clear out as much as he wants and replace it with whatever he