2014_06_04_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

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