The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10-05-1981 Planning MinutesiJ :-‘fii|,..v;^ AGENDA r ■ / / ^ » I ” • r ; t' r ) r 'i. • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:30 PM MONDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1981 Council Representative - Mayor William B. Van Nest Cali to Order 1. Call to order/roll 1^ City Planner’s Report 2. Comprehensive Plan Status Report Action Items 3. #638 David Stearns, 2171 Shadywood Road Final Subdivision 4. #655 Michael Pluhm, 2710 Walters Port Lane Variance 5. #656 Richard Speeter, 659 Minnetonka Highland Lane "After the fact" Conditional Use Permit rA Work Session 6. #615 Judd Ringer, 2280 Wayzata Boulevard Subdivision 7. #654 Dicon, 2645 Watertown Road Subdivision Information Items 8. Winter schedule November thru March - Planning Commission to select 1st or 3rd Monday for regular meeting. 9.Imput from Planning Commission members concerning the changing of total membership of the Commission to a permanent 5 member body. lO. Appointment of Planning Commission member to Marina Committee. Approval of Minutes 11. Approval of the Planning Commission minutes of September 21, 1981. [ O l■iU-. > • MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 5, 1981 k.he Planning Coininission met on the above date. The following embers were present: Chairman Hammerel, Goetten, Rovegno, and McDonald. Adams arrived at 9:00 PM. A1 Olson and Jeanne Mabusth represented the City staff. Mayor Van Nest was not present. ATTENDANCE 7:30 PM 6^ A1 Olson addressed the Planning Commission about the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the Metropolitan Council approved the comprehensive plan on June 25, 1981. The next step was for the City Council to formally adopt the plan. The only substantive changes expected are: 1 - Changing population figures to match the 1980 census results now available. 2 - Adding sewer study areas #4 & #5 to the Urban Service Area. 3 - Adding figures for the expected 1990 sewer flow consistent with those in the 208 study. 4 - Identification of those parts of the Capital Improvements Program which have been completed during the last 18 months. Olson asked the Planning Commission to review the comprehensive plan for any minor changes that they might see fit. Planning Commission felt clarifications were needed in the definition of navigability, boat use, boat density and quasi-agricultural land uses. Olson state^^ that the minor changes would be made nd then the Council would act on it. Planning Commission members were to review the plan and make any additional comments by contacting Olson within the next two weeks or so. CITY PLANNER'S REPORT i ' I- fc'.'j.y..." Applicant was present. Mabusth noted that the City has acquired an additional 5' of right of way for Togo Road. Planning Commission found no problems. DAVID STEARNS 2171 Shadywood Final Cub^ivisior #630 Goetten moved to approve the Brenten Woods plat of David Stearns subject to the findings and conditions setforth in the staff resolution. Revegno seconded. Vote: Ayes (4), Nays (0). Mr. and Mrs Pluhm were present. Planning Commission reviewed the existing and proposed hardcover with staff. Rovegno was concerned with the enormous sized footings that would have to be removed. His concern was that the footings were so close to the lake and that to tear them out you would be making a big mess near the lakeshore. He asked would it be better to leave them in rather then tear them out? MICHAEL PLUHM 2710 Walters Port Lane Variance #655 \ Goetten suggested that the subdivision be formalized before they take any action on the variance application. pplicant showed the Planning Commission where the future tennis court would be. Planning Commission was concerned with all the hardcover problems. NCE V' ANNER’S «i - A; ".^ aflEHST'? •*’ Si! «#-i ITEARNS tadywood iibdivision . PLUHM liters me minutes cf the planning commission meeting of OCTOBER 5, etbick the 75--250 • and subject to the Si";,"""’ 2 - Elimin^^o^ Of hardcover.iminated potential building lot in the 0-1000* •j area to Lake Minnetonka. Traffic would be cut down off Walters Port Lane. and subject to the fo^..owing conditions: ^ fro« footings within the 0-75* setbackarea to be removed and returned to natural state prop^tv'^irors hardship that the subject shor*»iino a pie shape with an extensive curved lhrbij?ling"enveJlpef'°'’° ioetten seconded. Vote: Ayes (4), Nays (0). was an**addfii^n®®?''^ IJ®^® present. Goetten asked if there Dictur.^^^ ^ hoMse. looking at the oldir aftr?he"L:?" "‘’®" ^U® °«ered^no"h^?p''o^:dvLr"as to the best way to handle this. Applicant stated he knew that to excavate you needed a oe^it het ^was not involved in this project P®™^t but excavating Seviouc ^»ifte^ It inspection for the to the erosion of the Lnk"‘and^Ipee?er®sLte “?Lrwaf h°" next project. Goetten stated at that timflL advised him a permit was required and he agreed p!PH Hi.- . i: •••? .*:■ ■■ .wj Hi ••=;. ^=-> ;-v ••1 •• • \ ^,r.- ■: ■: MfTil investigate the best approach to the situation ONT.) T^'m ^■5 m PEETER tonka Lane al Use V pv# d:;yy‘ MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 5, 1981 Page 3 |abusth stated that one possibility was to enlarge the torm sewer. Applicant stated that cost wise it would very expensive and he would also have to remove several big trees. Speeter stated that all the erosion had taken place in a 6* area. He thought that his way was the best way to help purify the water before it drops into the lake. Goetten stated that, she personally found it difficult to approve this application since this is the second time he has come in with an "after the fact” application and he already has a hardcover problem on his property. Speeter stated that the City claimed the drainage problem was his problem to solve and he did so. Rovegno stated that he attended the Council meeting at which that advice was given to the applicant. Mabusth stated the storm sewer involves the entire area and is the City's responsibility and in no way could this have been the City Council's direction to applicant. Mabusth told applicant that he could hire his own engineer to review and report on real function of paved structure. McDonald moved to table the conditional use permit for ichard Speeter to give staff adequate time to review the pplication with city engineer and public works, providing that the applicant do nothing to improve the site until these opinions are obtained. Goetten seconded. Vote; Ayes (4), Nays (0). Applicant was not present. Gary Gabriel, the surveyor, was present. Two nearby neighbors were present for this application. Rovegno noted that on Lot 1 there was a small barn and stated that the lot was too small to hold animals of any type. Planning Commission found no real problems with the pro posed 9 lot plat but that they need additional septic testing and the wetlands to be designated on the revised plans. No action required. Applicant was not present. Gary Gabriel, the surveyor, was present. Goetten noted that there was 14 lots which would access off public road. Planning Commission stated that the road should be designed, in a winding manner, so that there wouldn't be so many accesses off the public road. r 1 No action required. SPEETER (CONT.) sifesr. JUDD RINGER 2280 Wayzata Blvd. Subdivision #615 DICON 2645 Watertown Rd. Subdivision #654 ' ■ -*i K\*€z: .y ■ . MiTi .' .•■ ?:■>'■ AH WiT#rail •JIMI WfTsra# ! V •" .? :.-t • ■'■ ,"y';k;;-; . :] ,.;'V'; ,:/•: f ■^/,• •IfTiTcIil \m9rn^£9\ ■ •:• • •• '.■. ■•■• ; :' • • '.'i' ’-V "• ••’. /y. v;---V‘-V.-■- ■ ’ ;y ;; '•• ■'• ’ ■ "'' '' ^'. ■A :.- V: ... ; . ■• •■ • • ,:y ' .: " ‘B y.-v::; -E ;... :-. .. . :1' : . \ • Iv • : V-y.;- •;::V V-/. •• ir .E-... ... -i- •-•.•,••••••.••: . •■ • .' •.•..''•,•,•.= ••■.•;• v.V .:^A-v---V •:• •.‘^v ■‘••■j..;.’:-V<;-:-. v: .: ,-..v. y ■-:••: ;.-•••••••> Cvv :• .-. . •• ^ lE-.y I: ' ■• y , =iy - -y y^V:--- = . •*, '.-Av**.. -.:.• •*.. , • ••••.;* • •• : . . ^ •*'•■ ‘ ' •*. •■::=; ;vr;-Vr::yV-.-;V i ";• •.•■■•.•.; • • ;..• ■• . =j- J-. ; V‘.v . ■ . .:V. . -vy-V Mfl ... ^ •: :• •■•. ••• '..Vj.'- . ■ !■ r:'c.py;:;.>E:;n, .y^^hil.^y.^:^;;•■•■•i•;:>^•:vy - .y..; V- ■■■■ ■■ . ••:. ' •/■. i ' .’ ■•• .- '-y.: n