Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />June 12,2001 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Baker asked the Commissioners to consider removing the condition for <br />clustering of the mailboxes because of the inconvenience and maintenance issues. He stated <br />that the storm water pond should be considered part of the 12,000 square foot lot size. <br /> <br />Commissioner Schuster stated that he has an easement in his backyard which has water in it <br />and does not feel it is a problem. He stated that as long as the buyer is aware of the fact <br />when he purchases the lot, there should not be an issue. <br /> <br />Commissioner Baker asked for clarification on the additional lot to be added if the County <br />agreed to allow sharing of the ponding easement. Mr. Graser stated that there would be 99 <br />lots with either plan. <br /> <br />Commissioner Mesich expressed his concern that the City Council slated this parcel for <br />development with urban services in 2007. Ms. McPherson explained that the City Council <br />approved a land use amendment in 2000 to allow city sewer and water to be extended to this <br />area in 2001 and the property was immediately assessed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Mesich asked why the drawings were not presented to them until tonight. <br />Ms. McPherson stated that she received them yesterday. <br /> <br />Chair Pederson felt there are still some unknowns regarding the plat. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ropp stated he was not sure of allowing lot sizes of 12,000 square feet on the <br />lots with the ponds. Mr. Graser eXplained that there would be 30-40 feet from the back of <br />the homes to the pond. Mr. Harlicker stated that 20 feet of useable area is typical from the <br />back of the house to any type of easement. Ms. McPherson explained that the city's policy is <br />that easements are to be part of lots rather than outlots. Outlots tend to go tax forfeit, <br />which results in a loss of tax revenue and a city maintenance responsibility. She stated that if <br />the Commission is concerned about the size of the lot, they could take Chair Pederson's <br />suggestion to reduce the size of the plat by one or two lots in order to accommodate larger <br />lots sizes for the lots in the area of concern. She noted that part of the reason the drawings <br />were submitted late was because staff and the developer had a difficult time getting a <br />response from the County Attorney. <br /> <br />Chair Pederson asked if there is still an outstanding issue with the County. Ms. McPherson <br />stated that the only request the County Attorney had was that the developer and staff speak <br />to the County Ditch Inspector. Mr. Graser noted that the ditch inspector is on vacation. <br /> <br />Commissioner Mesich stated that he was uncomfortable with the overall density of the plat, <br />if Outlot C will is to be platted as townhomes. <br /> <br />Commissioner Franz asked if a traffic study has been done to look at Street G and was <br />concerned that the City would have another" Auburn Street" problem, due to the density of <br />the development proposed for this area. McPherson stated that there could be a potential <br />traffic issue on a temporary basis. She explained that when the 75 acres to the south of <br />Kliever Lake Fields is developed, this property is adjacent to 175th Avenue which will allow a <br />long term north-south connection from County Road 12 to 175th, as well as providing <br />another connection to the east to Fillmore Street. This "horse shoe" configuration will <br />provide road connections to go north to County Road, south to 175th, east to Fillmore <br />Street, or west to Twin Lakes Boulevard. <br /> <br />. <br />