2006 04-10 CC PACKET - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CITY OF GEM LAKE Office of the City Clerk 1369 County Road "E" East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 Telephone: ( 651) 426 - 6443 Email: gemlakecity@aol.com -4� -mil o-/ —1 yam Memo to: Mayor Emeott From: Jack Hoeschler, Planning Commission Chair Date: April 6, 2006 Re: Planning Commission Meeting of April 4, 2006 Facsimile: ( 651) 426 - 6444 The Gem Lake Planning Commission held its March meeting at 7 pm on Tuesday, April 4, 2006, at Tousley Ford. All members except Mrs. Robins were present along with Paul Emeott acting as co -zoning administrator, Rick Rossow and Bryan Hades for the McNulty team and Gretchen Swomley and Mary Shearen for the public. We discussed the following: 1. Review of Hillary Farm Site Plan Review Process. Mr. Hoeschler explained that the City and the McNulty team were trying to flesh out a procedure and process for the site plan review that is called for in the Developer's Agreement. The City has designated Mr. Emeott and Craig Rafferty as initial representatives of a site plan review committee that will be formally appointed by the Council if this process seems fruitful. The idea is that the site plan review committee will be delegated authority by the Council to make decisions that will be binding on the City regarding up or down review and approval of site plans for specific lot developments in Hillary Farm. The City and the McNulty team will describe the process agreed upon in an amendment to the Developer's Agreement. In the near term, we are testing and developing the concept by means of negotiations involving the landscaping that will be required for those homes already under construction or completed. Mr. Rafferty then gave a slide presentation reporting on the progress made regarding the landscaping for Lots 6 and 7. (Landscaping for the model has been previously discussed.) He showed views of the lakefront homes and structures and emphasized the "peek-a-boo" quality of the relationship between existing structures and the lake as a result of the screening of the structures provided by trees and topography. He also reported that the new process attempted to move away from repeated responses by the City to proposals by the developer in which the developer has to "guess" what the City wants to an iterative process by which the City describes graphically the values and features it hopes to protect and see and the developer responds with detailed drawings based (in this case) upon discussions with the lot owners. At the end of his presentation Mr. Rafferty showed a screening plan that he had presented to McNulty and the responding landscaping plan that Bryan Hades had prepared. Mr. Rafferty spoke approvingly of the process and the result. The audience members then gave their comments. Mrs. Shearen expressed concern that the screening of the Lot 6 house (Larkin's) was too minimal. She urged Mr. Rafferty to continue his efforts on behalf of the plan he outlined originally. Mrs. Swomley also wanted to see more screening and expressed concern that the proposed plan did not address the north border of Lot 7. Mr. Hades said that the Tangwell's were considering lilacs along that fence. But Mrs. Swomley invited Mr. Rafferty to view the Tangwell house from her property to see how large it looms on the horizon. Mr. Rafferty felt that they were within a handful of trees of an agreed plan. Mr. Hoeschler asked Mr. Hades whether there were any plans to alter the elevation and grove of trees on the westerly boundary of Lot 6. Mr. Hades said that there were no such plans even though Mr. Hoeschler pointed to a contour grade model that had been sent from HKGI to Mr. Rafferty. He said he knew nothing of that model again assured Mr. Hoeschler that the grove would not be disturbed. Mr. Hoeschler (joined by Mr. Wippich) said that the developer should not regard the view corridor as either a bowling alley or a landing strip. They urged inclusion of trees within the view corridor to offset the light well quality that currently exists to the view from the Bemis house because of the mass of the two buildings on either side. Mr. Hoeschler also urged Mr. Rafferty to make sure that the final landscaping plan that is agreed upon documents the initial size and number of trees. He urged use of spade planted trees as opposed to saplings in 2 gallon buckets. He said it was important to have a clear document so that everyone (including the homeowners) knows and agrees upon what will be done.and what is expected.