Laserfiche WebLink
Regular Planning CommissionMeeting <br />Minutes –Wednesday, June 4, 2014 <br />Page 10 <br />with the Mueller property, Mr. Amlie opined that once the Commission gave itsgo-ahead, <br />457 <br />and his situation only became worse; he questioned what his recourse would then be. <br />458 <br />Mr. Amlie opined that the neighborhood unanimously opposed this project, as they <br />459 <br />understoodit to be detrimental to their property values; and further opined that therefore, <br />460 <br />it would be irresponsible for the Commission to approve it if only on that basis.Mr. Amlie <br />461 <br />noted previous comments about the property being successful, and questioned for whom, <br />462 <br />Mr. Mueller or the neighborhood.Mr. Amlie stated that he walked the area daily, and <br />463 <br />opined that the number of people driving down the street far exceeded the engineer’s <br />464 <br />estimate; and with no sidewalk, there was no other place to walk safely.Mr. Amlie <br />465 <br />encouraged the Commission to reject this proposal. <br />466 <br />Chair GisselquistclosedPublic Hearing at 7:50p.m.;noone else spokefor or against. <br />467 <br />MOTION <br />468 <br />Member Murphymoved, seconded by Member Boguszewskito recommend to the <br />469 <br />City Council APPROVAL of the proposed OAKE ACRES PRELIMINARY PLAT; <br />470 <br />based on the comments and findings of Sections 4 –6 and the recommendation of <br />471 <br />Section 7 of the staff report dated June 4, 2014. <br />472 <br />Commission Discussion <br />473 <br />Chair Gisselquist <br />recognized the opposition from the neighborhood, represented by <br />474 <br />their formal petition to that affect.However, in the end, Chair Gisselquist opined that in <br />475 <br />approving the plat, as a property owner, Mr. Mueller had a right to do a lot of things, and <br />476 <br />had come forward with a plat to reorganize his lot to sell and dispose of a portion of the <br />477 <br />property.Since it seems that the plat met the legalities of current City Code, even with a <br />478 <br />substandard road that was supported by the City Engineer, Chair Gisselquist opined that <br />479 <br />the plat appeared large enough to handle four, single-family homes in that area, and he <br />480 <br />deferred to the Public Works Department and Planning staff’s expertise in making their <br />481 <br />recommendations. <br />482 <br />While ponding solutions are always challenging, Chair Gisselquist, living on the other <br />483 <br />side of Cleveland Avenue in an area with similar drainage issues, stated that he was very <br />484 <br />familiar with how ponds worked and drained.Chair Gisselquist noted that water was dealt <br />485 <br />with differently as the years went by, and further noted that Mr. Mueller had noted the <br />486 <br />creek was filled in by neighbors in the past which would no longer occur with current <br />487 <br />Watershed District rules.Chair Gisselquist observed that the new plat allowed for four <br />488 <br />ponds located in a way to best mitigate drainage; and while the goal was not to solve the <br />489 <br />existing neighborhood water problems, it could not make them worse than they are. <br />490 <br />Chair Gisselquist agreed with staff’s analysis and felt it would meet the needs of the <br />491 <br />development and neighborhood and not prove overly-burdensome in additional traffic in <br />492 <br />the neighborhood, and therefore, he spoke in support of the motion. <br />493 <br />Member Boguszewski <br />stated that he agreed with most of Chair Gisselquist’s comments, <br />494 <br />with a few additional thoughts.In his review of the written petition and the five points <br />495 <br />raised, Member Boguszewski opined that the engineering solution should work to <br />496 <br />address drainage concerns; and expressed his need to accept the testimony of the City <br />497 <br />Engineer on soils and increased quality of retention and control in the future. <br />498 <br />Specific to the petition’s concerns with tree removal from the property, Member <br />499 <br />Boguszewski stated that those issues had been previously addressed tonight, and an <br />500 <br />inventory would be taken in accordance with tree preservation plans. <br />501 <br />Regarding density of homes and their contrast with the present community standard of <br />502 <br />large lots, Member Boguszewski opined that, while that may be true for a certain section <br />503 <br />of the community, it was not true for all, including some of the lots across Acorn (e.g. <br />504 <br />2282 or 2182) on the other side of the ponds.While it may be denser, Member <br />505 <br />Boguszewski opined that to him, density was something that needed to be protected in <br />506 <br />some of those areas. <br />507 <br /> <br />