12-05-89 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 5, 1989 PAGE 2 City Engineer, Larry Bohrer, referred to his review letter dated November 22, 1989. Bohrer made the following corrections to his letter: #5. Impervious Surface Calculation is 27%, and the current allowable impervious for this lot size is 35%. Therefore, there is no violation of the impervious surface portion of the ordinance. #10. Drainage: If impervious surface stays as proposed, 1.18 acres, (0.35 x 1.18 = 0.41 acre feet), the pond size would have to be 0.41 acre feet. Mayor Dunn reinforced the drainage concerns of the Council in that area. Bohrer pointed out clarification was needed by the Council on number of parking spaces required dependinng on how they interpret the number of parking spaces for the banquet room which is the basement of the present restaurant, unclear from the code if a gazebo is considered an accessory structure or even what number and what size an accessory structure is allowed in a GB Zone. Ed Gorman was present to answer any questions. B. Public Hearing: Variance for Height of Accessory Structure in Rl Zone Applicant: Michael & Cheryl Hilyar, 8961 37th St. N. This variance request was withdrawn by the applicant. C. Informati.onal Report: Planning Commission 11/27/89 Councilman Williams reported one of the Planning Commission members, as well as the staff, suggested deletion of the Planned Unit Development. Therefore, the following motion was made: MIS/ Williams/Hunt - to direct the PZ to continue discussions and to make a recommendation as to whether or not the P.U.D. Ordinance should be removed from the Code. Councilman Graves saw no advantage of getting rid of the PUD Ordinance because it provides the City with another tool to allow different types of development, residential or otherwise, to take place within the community. Councilman Hunt referred to a past meeting when Attorney Knaak recommended that many cities he has worked with do not have this type of ordinance because it takes away some of the control from the City. M/No Second Graves - to amend the motion to include the PZ is recommended to place the P.U.D. discussion as a low priority item on their work plan compared to completion of the review of the Comprehensive Plan, completion of the I-94 Business District Ordinance and completion of the Residential Estates Zoning Ordinance. Councilman Williams saw no reason why they can't go on simultaneously. 1. The RE and I-94 Ordinances will have to wait until the Comp Plan is done and the Deputy Clerk has informed him, as a result of a workshop she attended, more work is needed on the Comp Plan.