Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-08-1987 Planning Minutesr MIHDTBS OP THE PLMnUHG COHMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 IDANCE 7:03 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Acting Chairman Bellows, Johnson, Hanson, Cohen and Brown. Chairman Kelly and Taylor were absent. The following represented the City staff: Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Septic and Zoning Aide Knott, and Deputy Clerk Naab. CounciImembers Peterson, Goetten and Callahan were also present. ZONING AMENDMENT - ACCESSORY STRUCTURE PUBLIC HEARING 7:03 - 7:05 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Brown to table discussion of the zoning amendment for accessory structures until September 21, 1987 meeting of the Planning Commission. *1194 MICHAEL PLANK 4145 WATERTOmi ROAD CLASS 111 SUBDIVISION > PLAT PUBLIC HEARING 7:32 - 7:55 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. & Mrs. Michael Plank were present for this matter. Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained this is the formal plat and as requested in the sketch plan review, staff did go out and define the actual boundaries of the wetlands on Lot 1 that will not be defined at a specific elevation. The 10' drainage and utility easement has been shown along the east side along Lot 2 and this is also to be used for the granting of an access easement in favor of Lot 3 over Lot 2. A 15' drainageway easement has been designated entering the property on the north side flowing into the wetlands on Lot 1 and meandering down into the wetlands that have already been dedicated in a previous subdivision in 1978-79 on Lot 3. The engineer has asked that the wetlands on Lot 3 be designated at the 933 elevation but the City may wish to postpone any redesignation of these wetlands until a further subdivision. It is Mr. Plank's intent at some future date to create another building site on the northern portion of Lot 3. The need to designate a drainage easement for the culvert and drainageway that comes in from the east from Mr. Sawchuck's property under the driveway was discussed by the Planning Commission. The engineer has shown it running along the east property line further south into the wetlands. Mr. Plank has also requested that the City wait on this matter until the future subdivision of Lot 3. MIHwTBS OF THE PIAHHIHG COMMISSION MBBTING BICTJl SBPTBMBBR 8, 1987 #1194 MICHAEL PLANK 4145 NATERTONM ROAD Asst Planning 6 Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that this subdivision also involved rearranging the lot lines for Lots 1 and 2 to make Lot 3 a better buildable lot. Mr. & Mrs. Sawchuck, 4105 Watertown Roadr expressed their concern that their house is only 3 feet off the east property line and the driveway from Lot 3 runs right under his bedroom^ kitchen and bath windows. If this lot is further subdivided this will create even more traffic and this will also create additional drainage concerns. Chairman Bellows noted that because of topographic concerns, the rule of “one plat, one road" is not appropriate for this situation. The two northern lots will have to be accessed from Watertown Road, therefore, only 2 parcels. Lot 3 and the future lot divided from it, would be using the driveway on the east between the Plank and Sawchuck properties. There were no other comments from the public. It was moved by Brown, seconded by Hanson, to approve the three lot plat application of Michael Plank's subject to the following conditions: 1. The drainage ditch adjacent to Watertown Road (resulting from installation of access drive to house on Lot 3) must be moved approximately 27 feet south of the centerline of Watertown Road. 2. Dedication of 33 feet of right-of-way for Watertown Road. 3. Protected wetlands on Lot 3 to be redesignated at the time of a future subdivision of Lot 3. 4. Payment of $100.00 park fee for creation of Lot 3. 5. Owner of Lot 2 to grant access and utility easement over 10 feet drainage and utility easement along east lot line in favor of Lot 3. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MIHUTBS OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 •1176 RICHARD POTNAN 2765 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES REFERRED BACK FROM COUNCIL Mr. Richard Putnam was present for this matter. Acting Chairman Bellows explained that she was the representative at the Council meeting when this was presented. The Planning Commission originally denied this application 4-1 because the Commission had a lot of questions and reservation about this application, and Mr. Putnam wished to not be tabled for a month but be sent on to Council. The general concensus from the Council was there was no strong feeling about how the Planning Commission felt on this issue. As it was brought before the Council, the need for an additional variance was determined by staff and at that point it wa recommended that it be brought back to the Planning Commission for further review. Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the original review of this application presumed that the edge of the dedicated road came to a point further east, but in fact the dedicated roadway cuts into the property more than expected which does change the street setback for the garage from 38* to 20'. The property to the south has the same portion of dedicated roadway over their property anu to the north it is questionable. The road is actually off-set from the corridor quite a bit. The major change resulting^is the 250-500' zone is actually smaller. In calculating hardcover for the property within the dedicated right-of-way, which yields a hardcover percentage reduction from 85% down to 48%; or, if applicant's property for hardcover purposes does not include the dedicated right-of-way the hardcover reduction percentages are from _ _% down to _ _%. Mr. Putnam noted that nothing has changed but the interpretation of the plat. Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained if the garage faces the street, it requires a 30' setback. The attachment of it to the house also means the entire 20' from the right-of-way where 30' is required. He noted that per the drafted resolution, page 3, 4 variances are required (5 if the 250-500' area is separate). Johnson felt that the Commission had denied the application once and he feels that the application should not have been brought back to the Commission. MIHUTBS OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 #1176 RICHARD PUTNAM 2765 CASCO POINT ROAJ It was moved by Acting Chairman Bellows, seconded by Cohen to deny application #1176 for Richard Putnam of 2765 Casco Point Road, based upon the number of variances required for this project, all of which when combined together constitute an overly ambitious use of the land. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Cohen noted that he seconded the motion because he feels that if this application is approved it would be setting a negative precedent. #1184 GERALD T. MCCOORTNEY 1055 FERNCALE ROAD NEST VARIANCES CONTINUATION OP A PUBLIC HEARING 7:05 - 7:07 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Gerald McCourtney and James Cradit, his architect, were present. Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the applicant is seeking a hardcover variance for a bathroom, laundrette and dinette addition in the lakeshore yard. This is a 1.5% increase in hardcover in the 75-250' setback area. They also will require a 15' side setback variance; 30' side setback is required. The house currently does encroach into this setback and they will not be encroaching any more. There is no increase of deck space and the additions are actually over the existing deck area. Mr. McCourtney noted that the house is older and while they are doing these additions and remodeling they will also be replacing inadequate windows. This project should bring their home up to a closer valuation as others in the neighborhood. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Staff has received no negative comments from any of the surrounding neighbors. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Hanson to approve the side setback and hardcover variances as proposed. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1186 DOUG BUMGARDNER 3800 WAYZATA BOULEVARD CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT/COMMERCIAL SITE PTJUN REVIEW WITHDRAWN PER APPLICANT'S REQUEST MIBDTBS OF THE PLAMNIMG COMMISSIOH NEBTIIIG HKTJl SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 #1187 MORTH ARM ESTATES ASSOCIATIOM 215, 340, 350, 360 AMD 370 NORTH ARM LAME COMDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC BEARING 7:11 - 7:30 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Rod Backerud was present for this matter. Acting Chairman Bellows explained the Assocation is seeking a conditional use permit to excavate/fill 3 berm areas in excess of 100 cubic yards and placement of 4,858 cubic yards of spoils from dredging of North Arm Channel. Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the berms will not be created from the spoils material. The soil will come from excavated materials from the interior lands to create the berm areas. The spoils will go into the excavated areas behind the berms tying into existing elevations. Mr. Backerud explained they would like to do this project in 2 phases to allow the spoils to settle as they will be 5-1 water/soil ratio. What they are trying to do is get 15,000 cubic yards of capacity using all available lands. They intend to stay out of the 931.5 elevation area. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Acting Chairman Bellows noted that she would like to actually see how the spoils will be used, how the spoils will be made to work, and what the end product will look like (need for final grading plans). Planning Commission can give conceptual direction and provide applicant with some answers to nis questions, and require a final grading plan for a return appearance before the Commission. The key to a large part of this project is soil borings and that will tell us the most about what the property can hold and whether the berms will work. Hanson felt that the primary concern that he had was the impact of the dredging on the area but the DNR has primary jurisdiction over this. He would also like to see final grading plans and feels positive about the project but cautiously so. Johnson and Cohen both felt that this was a good workable plan. Brown also noted that the property on Old Beach Road is very similar and not offensive looking. Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that spoils must be kept from washing back into the lake. MimmS OP THE PIAMHIVG COHMISSIOH MEBTIMG HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 #1187 NORTH ARM ESTATES ASSOCIATION 215, 340, 350, 360 AMD 370 NORTH ARM LANE It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Bellows to conceptually approve the dredging of North Arm Channel based upon the following conditions and requirements: 1. Final grading plans; 2. Soil boringL and appropriate engineering design for use of the spoils holding area. 3. Approval from the appropriate agencies, MWCD, DNR and PCA. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Mr. Backerud asked about the time frame that they are looking at and was told that is strictly up to the other agencies but the earliest time to return to the Planning Commission would be the October 19, 1987 meeting and to the Council for approval on November 9, 1987. #1188 SHELDON KAPLAN 2695 KELLY AVENUE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:24 > 8:55 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mrs. Kaplan, Mr. Dahl, Mr. Kaplan's business partner, and Mr. Mike Growe, applicants' realtor, were present for this matter. Septic and Zoning Aide Knott explained the applicants' request for a lot area variance for Lot 1 to create a buildable lot for a single family residence and lot area variance and hardcover variance for Lot 2. The 75-2'>0' hardcover on Lot 2 went from 25% existing to 30% proposed as Lot 1 is no longer figured into this calculation. The lots in the immediate area are very similar in size to the proposed lots, however, they do get larger the further away you go. NIHUTBS OP VBB PIABHIMG COMMISSION MEETING fi #1188 SHELDON KAPLAN 2695 KELLY AVENUE SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 Mr. Dahl explained that when the Kaplans purchased this property in 1958, there was no minimum lot size or hardcover requirements. The property taxes have always been under two separate indentification numbers and been paid separately. Municipal sewer and water was assessed on both lots. The size of the two lots is fairly consistent with the immediate neighborhood lots. Basically, they are looking for flexibility in marketing the two lots as they are selling their home. The hardship is that the applicants lose marketability without the option to sell both lots as buildable. The Kaplans have always been under the impression that the second lot was buildable. He explained that when the ordinances were changed to require minimum lot sizes, there was a clause that stated that variances could be approved for undersized lots platted prior to the adoption of the ordinance to alleviate the hardship for these owers. Acting Chairman Bellows noted that the Commission may not consider a financial hardship as the only hardship for approving a variance. She noted that the second lot is the majority of the Kaplans' yard and they have in fact been using it as such. She also explained that the ordinances also state that when there is an oportunity to combine substandard lots, that is the direction that the City requires. In this case, if the two lots are combined, they barely are over the 1 acre minimum. She noted that the owners have other options in the sale of this lot. The City may be interciLed in purchasing the property adjacent to the lake access or lot may be sold to an adjacent neighbor as a riparian lot as long as that owner executes a special lot combination. MIHOTBS OP THE PLAHNIliG CQMNISSIOH MEETING merj> SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 #1188 SHELDON KAPLAN 2695 KELLY AVENOE Septic & Zoning Aide Knott noted that the valuation went from $60r000 to $40,000 in 1982, to reflect the substandard area of the lot anJ the need for variances to build. Mr. Growe feels that selling the two lots together is less desirable than selling them separately. Jxm Berg, 2655 Lydiard Avenue, voiced the following concerns with the approval of these variances: 1. Lot 1 is .52 acres; and Lot 2 is .62 acres. The significate variances that are being discussed are somewhere between 38 and 48% variance. This would be a bad impact on the ordinance. 2. Negative precedent setting. 3. Curb cuts - safety factor for both pedestrians and traffic. 4. Additional hardcover - creates more drainage problems. 5. There is no hardship. The original developer was denied a similar variance when the property was developed. 6. The Kaplans reside there only in the warm months. 7. An informal survey indicates that the majority of the neighbors are against the approval because of the safety concerns raised. Acting Chairmar. Bellows questioned staff about the issue of lot width variances required and whether the City staff had heard from any of the other neighbors. Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that 140' lakeshore is required for a buildable lot, however, the ordinances state that it is measured at the front setback line and both are corner lots and therefore meet the required width. 8 NIHDTBS OF THE PLANNIliG COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 #1188 SHELDON KAPLAN 2695 KELLY AVENUE Mrs. Kaplan stated that she and her husband bought the two lots and there was no ordinance in effect. They had always considered the second lot buildable and found out only by accident the second lot was declared non-buiIdable without variances. Mrs. Kaplan explained that chey had never used the second lot but only kept it mowed so the neighbors would not complain. If the second lot is sold to the City^ this would create even more traffic. The hardcover on Lot 2 (existing residence) exceeds the limits but only because it is there to enhance the lot by putting gravel along the house instead of letting the eaves shade the sod. Mrs. Kaplan said that they are just asking for the rights that they had when the property was purchase .. Lucy Uphoff» 2699 Kelly wenue, voiced the same concerns that Mr. Berg had previous!' stated. Arlene Garrity, 2701 Kelly Avenue, also felt the s ime. CounciImember Callahan "ixplained that the original developer of Carman Cove had not oeen denied a variance for a similar application but rather there was a question as to how many lots the plat could be subdivided into. Rich and Debbie Rice, 2700 Kelly Avenue, explained that the neighborhood is congested enough and if this is allowed would only add to the drainage problems that exist currently. They would like to preserve the atmosphere of the neighborhood. Hanson stated that he in no way could approve the variances for the separate buildable lot. Perhaps the City should look to purchasing the second lot. Johnson noted that he could not approve variances for the lots because of all the constraints on the lots. Also, if the variances were approved, the second lot would probably require more variances just to build the house. Cohen stated that he felt that it is not fair that the applicants bought the lots always assuming that the second was buildable, however, when the County re-evaluated the second lot, perhaps they should have realized that the lot was no longer considered buildable per the current ordinances. The building envelope is too restricted to place a residence on the lot, and perhaps the City should look to purchasing the property. Brown felt that the safety, drainage, and access to and from Kelly Avenue were all issues of great concern and adding additional residences in this area would only add to the existing problems. MIHUTBS OF THE PUtmUNG CONNISSIOM MBBTIIIG SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 #1188 SHELDON KAPLAN 2695 KELLY AVENUE Acting Chairman Bellows stated that it is the responsibility of the City to correct bad situations whenever possible and suggests either combining the two lots or selling the second lot as a non-buildable lot. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Johnson, to deny application #1188 for Mr. & Mrs. Sheldon Kaplan of 2695 Kelly Avenue for lot area and hardcover variances for Lots 1 and 2. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. NORTON#1189 JAl 20 WEAR LAME VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:10 - 9:26 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. James Morton was present for this matter. Chairman Bellows explained this is an application for a front yard setback variance to construct an in-ground pool in front of the front line of the house. Septic & Zoning Aide Knott explained that the hardships for this applicant are the lot is a corner lot and thus has two roads, and if the location was moved to the side of the house there would be a safety concern as there are no windows on the side of the house. There is a house being constructed to the south of the subject property. There is a solar heating unit proposed for the pool also. Acting Chairman Bellows noted that the solar unit would constitute a second accessory structure. Mr. & Mrs. Zimmerman, owners of the property to the south, voiced no objection to either the fence or pool, but were unaware of the visual impact of the solar unit. They also noted that they had planned to plant trees along the lot line. Acting Chairman Bellows felt that this is an appropriate location for the pool. She felt that the issue of the solar unit as an accessory structure should be tabled until the neighbors have had a chance to review the plans. It was moved by Chairman Bellows, seconded by Hanson, to approve application #1189 for James Morton, 20 Wear Lane, for a front yard setback variance to construct an in-ground pool in front of the front line of the house subject to requiring a second approval for the solar collector tabled until the neighbors have had an oportunity to review the plans. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. NIIIUTBS OP THE PLANNIIIG COMMISSION MEBTIIIG BRTJ) SEPTEMBER 8* 1987 #1190 WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB 200 NAYZATA BOULEVARD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 9:27 - 9:37 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. John Bosshart of Bosshart Christenson Corporation, project managers for the Wayzata Country Club, was present. Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the applicants are requesting a conditional use permit to permit a circular addition to the existing club house on the northwest side to serve as a 1ivingroom/lounge area. This requires a conditional use permit because it is in a residential zone and therefore there is no basis for a commercial site plan. They will also be reducing 5' of grade on the north side of the driveway, approximately 9,600 cubic yards of fill that shall be placed on the south side of Highway 12 which Is in the City of Wayzata. The proposed slopes will be more gentle and the City will ask that the slopes be 4:1. The berm at the end of the downhill run of the alteration may create some channelization problems per the City Engineer. Mr. P'>- . hart noted most of the work will be done Inside the club iiouse. They would like to request that the berms be allowed to be a 3:1 ratio for safet’ factors to keep balls from going over the berms. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Mark Gronberg, site surveyor, noted that the berm at the end of the downhill slope is not necessary and can be eliminated. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to approve application #1190 for the Wayzata Country Club for a conditional use permit subject to the conditions as follows: 1. The applicant must process all appropriate permits with the City of Wayzata prior to filling. 2. Berms shall be constructed at 3:1 per the request by the applicant. 3. Applicant to work with City staff to deve.op an acceptable berm mound at the downhill slope which will address the engineer's concern for drainage. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MIHOTBS OF THE PLANIIIBG COMMISSION MBBTIliG H1CTJ> SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 •1191 MED, IMC. 2220/2235 PREMCH CREEK CIRCLE AFTEk-THE-PACT CONDITIONAL OSB PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 9:37 - 9:45 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. Edward Dayton and Mr. Ed Zimmerman, representing Gary Carlson, were present. Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the berm was created sometime around the final grading for the subdivision. It was placed within the residential pads where the City had not approved any kind of land alteration. It did affect the septic site for Lot 5, however, there was additional land available for a new site. Staff discovered the berm after members of the Crystal Bay neighborhood brought it to the attention of staff. Mr. Dayton stated that the berm was discussed at the public hearing in the spring of 1984 and after the berm was constructed, a staff member walked the site and sugaested alterations to the south end and the right-hand side because there is a City draintile that comes down and drains the water off Briar Street in one of the ponds and the berm was extending over that particular draintile. The berm was moved back to accommodate this request. Frank and Barbara Yessup, owners of Lot 5, noted that they would like the berm to be leveled off so as not to look like just a bump. Mr. Dayton explained that Mr. & Mrs. Yessup wish to extend the berm further to the north and implement it within their landscape plan. Acting Chairtiian Bellows insisted that the berm be properly maintained as it has become very overgrown with weeds. There were no other comments from the public. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to approve application #1191 for NED, Inc. or subsequent purchasers for an after-the-fact conditional use permit for a berm placed on Lots 5 and 6, French Creek, subject to the following conditions: 1. Berm not to exceed the height of 5*6". 2. Any subsequent work or extention of that berm be subject to the approval of the proper City authorities. 3. Proper maintenance of berm under ordinances by the owners of the property. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. current City MIHOTBS OP THE PLMOilHG COMMISSIOH NBBTTH6 HTtTJ^ SBPTBMBBR 8, 1987 #1193 THOMAS HU3BR 2815 SHADTMOOD ROAD VARIAHCB TABLED TO SEPTEMBER 21, 1987 #1195 BOB KOST 4760 TOMKA VIEH LANE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:04 - 10:15 TING The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. Bob Kost was present for this application. Septic & Zoning Aide Knott explained the applicant is requesting a lot area variance to create a buildable lot. The lot will be purchased as a tax forfeit lot. The hardship, as stated by the applicant, is that it was a pre~ platted parcel with no additional, contiguous land to purchase. The building pad meets all required setbacks and a curb cut has been approved for the property. This lot is similar in size to other lots in the neighborhood and several variances have been approved in the area in the past. Sewer is available and the property has been assessed one sewer unit. The property will need a well drilled because City water is not available. Hanson noted that unlike the Kaplan request, there is no drainage problem in the area, and the lot area is more consistent with current patterns of neighborhood development. It was moved by Brown, seconded by Cohen to approve application #1195 for Bob Kost at 4760 Tonka View Lane for a lot area variance to create a buildable lot, subject to the following conditions: 1. To dedicate a 12*i* road and utility easement along Tonka View Lane and to relocate house on site plan to meet required 35 feet setback. 2. To contact the Public Works Director for input on site access and curb cuts. 3. Applicant to pursue possible vacation of alley. 4. To dedicate drainage and utility easements on the property as advised by staff. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MIHUTBS OP THE PLAMNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 #1196 DENNIS MCGREEVT 340!- BASTLAKB STREET VARIANCES TABLB) INDEFINITELY •1192 MIKE HILBELINK/JOHN VOGT 320 OLD CRYSTAL BAT ROAD NORTH SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Mike Hilbelink and John Vogt were present for this matter. Their surveyor, Phil Nelson, was also present. Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that this plan was presented to the Park Commission and they concurred that they would not be interested at all in acquiring any park lands from this property but would prefer the money in lieu of the land. Lot 9 would be a through lot (having access on both sides of the property), but could be easily corrected by moving the cul-de-sac further to the eaf t. Lots 2 and 3 will require lot width variances. Variances will have to be granted because each one of the lots will be served by a private road instead of a public road. 2 lots ill be served by a shared drive. She noted that Planning Commission is asked to consider the need to extend the north/south outlet further north to service the northern parcels (in preparation of a future subdivision of these northern lots). Johnson noted that access to all newly created lots must be served by interior roads. Hanson stated that he felt there was no consistency with the subdivision as there are so many different sized lots. There is no cohesiveness in the layout. Mr. Vogt explained the property was platted in this way because a lot of the land is low and considered not buildable. There is one driveway currently accessing to Old Crystal Bay Road for the northern property so there would be no additional curb cuts and the northern properties just are not suited to be further subdivided because of the wetland. Johnson noted that it is inconceivable that a 30 acre parcel of property divided should have to require multiple variances. Building & Zoning Adminstrator Mabusth explained that Woodhaven Drive was platted right to the west edge suggesting a desire for a through road. When the City platted the Peterman Addition, there was clearly access taken to the northern border of that addition suggesting a possible need for an extension to the north. We have asked the applicant in their sketch plan to address those obvious concerns. The applicants have shown you a pattern and the roads would not be constructed until a future time when the City required them. NIMUTBS OP THE PLAmUNG COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 #1192 MIKE HILBELIMK/JOHH VOGT 320 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH Bill Hull, 2445 Woodhaven Drive, and representative of the Woodhaven Homeowners Association, expressed concern regarding the extension of the east/west access. He noted that the property owners on Woodhaven Drive had chosen to live on a private cul-de-sac and would like to maintain it that way. They do not want a main thoroughfare through their neighborhood. Acting Chairman Fellows explained that by approval of this road plan with outlets extension designated for future road expansion does not suggest that these roads are to be developed at this poxnt. The potential does exist if the City should deem that for the health and safety of the public or if at a future date the City should create a through road. No one is suggesting that the connection is to be made now, all that is being said is the option has to be left open. Bellows summarized that the Commission would like to see the east/west access on the plans, more common lot sizes and no variances required on these newly created lots. Asst Planning S Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the applicants should present some of their initial, conceptual layouts that were discarded, to show their progression of thought so that the Commission can follow how and why they got to where they are at with the layout presented here. He also noted that a soils map should be included. Maybe the items required for a sketch plan review should be examined and changed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Brown, seconded by Hanson to approve the minutes of the August 17, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE Johnson volunteered to attend the September 14, 1987 Council meeting in place of Cohen. Cohen was appointed to attend the September 28, 1987 Council meeting. ADJODRMENT 10:55 P.M.