Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />City of Elk River <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Agenda Section Meeting Date <br />Plannin A ril 17, 2006 <br />Item Description <br />Request by Jason Huber, for Preliminary Plat -Carverwood <br />Hills, Public Hearing-Case No. P 06-0 I <br /> <br />Item Number <br />6.3. <br />Prepared by <br />Scott Harlicker, Senior Planner <br />Reviewed by <br />Scott Clark, Community Development <br />Director <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br />The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval of Carverwood Hills. The applicant is proposing to <br />subdivide 53 acres into 5 residential lots. The property is located south on the east side of Brook Road at <br />213th Ave. alignment. The plat includes four 2.5 acre lots and one 41 acre lot. <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />The proposed plat is being considered under the 4 for 40 rule which allows 4 lots in 40 acres and allows <br />up to 3 of the lots to be less than the required 10 acre lot size. Past policy has been to expand the 4 for 40 <br />rule to apply to larger parcels. This proposal would be a 5 for 50. <br /> <br />The property is located in the area that will be able to develop at a density of 2.5 lots per acre in 2008. <br />The larger 41 acre lot could be further developed at that time. <br /> <br />The plat includes a temporary cuI de sac. When the larger lot is replatted, road connections to the north <br />and south will be included. Once the road connections to the north or south are completed and the <br />access to County Road 121 is no longer needed, that intersection will be eliminated and replaced with a <br />cul de sac. <br /> <br />The Park and Recreation Commission recommended cash to meet the park dedication requirements and <br />a 10 foot wide trail easement along County Road 121. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission considered this request at their March 14th meeting. One neighbor spoke at <br />the public hearing. He was concerned about the feasibility of the road connection to the north. The <br />Commission had the following comments: <br /> <br />. They felt that the 4 per 40 design was a way of avoiding the 10 acre minimum lot size and thought <br />the plat might be premature and should wait until 2008 when the minimum lot size is changed to <br />2.5 acres. <br />. They wanted additional information on how the properties to the north and south might develop <br />and the future intersections along County Road 121 so that they could better assess the north and <br />south road connections. <br />. They thought the applicant should look at developing the property as a cluster development. <br />