Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-12-73 PZMVILLAGE OF LAKE ELMO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE MEETING NOVEMBER 12, 1973 Meeting called to order at 7:45 p.m. Members present: Chairman Wm. Lundquist, B. Folz, J. Zignego, M. Eder, D. Lyons, C. King. Minutes of October 22nd meeting approved as submitted. Re -Hearing for Thomas Lindbeck, 8728 Demontreville Trail No. Mr. Lindbeck appeared regarding a special use permit to operate an auto repair shop in a resident garage. He presented his proposal for doing auto repair work in his garage. A motion was made by B. Fo17, seconded by J. Zignego, that a recommendation for a special use permit be denied due to the following conditions: 1. Comprehensive plan doesn't call for commercial business. 2. This would be a commercial use in a residential area. 3. There is not an adequate turn -around for commercial operation. 4. The character of the area is residential and is platted as such. 5. Lot is too small for a house and business. Motion carried unanimously. Attached is a list of persons attending the hearing. The majority of the people attending the hearing were in objection to the proposed special use permit. Mrs. David Hardy, 2742 Ivy Ave. No., appeared regarding village -awned property adjacent to her property. She feels the open basement on the property creates a hazard. She also expressed interest in purchasing the property. Mrs. Hardy was told she would have to contact the village council on these matters. A lot r}ext to the village lot has two open wells. Both problems should be inspected by a village employee and the results reported to the village council. Douglas Whitman, 5324 Lake Elmo Ave. No., appeared regarding subdivision of his 7.2 acre tract which lies immediately south of Arvold Acres. He was informed a variance would be needed due to 5-acre minimum zoning. A motion was made by B. Folz and seconded by C. King that the PZC recommend to the council that the tract be allowed to be split into two equal tracts if the following problems are resolved: 1. One adequate driveway for both tracts. 2. Any drainage problems be resolved. 3. The proposed building site be identified. 4. Suitable percolation tests are done. 5. 5' contour interval map be provided including existing topography. .6. Any questions arising from an on -site inspection be resolved. 7. All of the above information be submitted to the PZC for review and approval providing the concept of a variance for splitting the tract is granted by the council. -2- motion was made by B. Folz that, because the subdivision falls in the category of a minor subdivision as defined in Subdivision PEgulation Code, Section 12C, we feel platting would not be necessary. We recommend a variance from the platting regulations but require that five copies of a certificate of survey signed by a registered land surveyor be filed with the village clerk. The description of this tract is a simple proportional part of the section bordered by platted property on the north and therefore will not cause identification problems. Motion seconded by C. King. Motion carried unanimously. The mining operation in the NE corner of Section 16 should be reviewed regarding the conditions of any existing permit and land reclamation plan. Meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, C. King /smp / Vey 1,0d , eC)//S /1-7ft rt, 44, 7-)7 .r E C/4147--t?‘ 4.