10 - Minutes 042006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

c. Once acceptable to the City Engineer,the design shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Revisions shall be made to address Planning `-' Commission concerns. d. Once Planning Commission member's concerns have been addressed,the Planning Commission shall approve the design and it shall become a controlling document for the development. All members voted"aye". Motion carried. APPLICANT: Scott Pederson. Applicant requests Preliminary Plat of Tall Timbers. Applicant was present and excused himself from the Planning Commission. Mr. Marohn explained the Staff Report. Mr. Pederson was advised he could obtain a building permit with the conditional use permit approval. He stated he plans to start constructing the units furthest from the lake. A motion was made by Dean Williams, seconded by John Derksen, to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat of Tall Timbers, based on the following findings of fact: 1. The land is properly zoned and has had commercial waterfront uses on the property for a number of years. 2. There is a bluff located on the south side of the property leading down to the lake. The property, however, is large enough to place development outside of the bluff and bluff impact zones. There are no other significant natural or historic features on the property that would impede redevelopment of the property. 3. The property currently contains several structures, but does not contain any nonconforming structures. The majority of the structures will be removed, with the units on Lots 1 and 15 and some commonly owned structures on Lot 16 remaining. 4. The applicant has proposed to maintain the in-ground steps to access the lake and to place two docks on the western part of the shoreline. There are not any near- shore aquatic conditions that would hinder or limit access to the lake along the property line. 5. The proposed development, as it is a PUD, is not subject to the normal lot size and dimension standards for the underlying zoning district. The proposed development does, however, meet the minimum design standards for a planned unit development. 6. The proposed design layout for lots will not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding property as the majority of the properties in the immediate area have already been platted or otherwise subdivided. 7. The common area in the proposed development meets the minimum requirement for frontage on a public right-of-way, having more than the required 33 feet of frontage. 8. The applicant does not propose to construct any new public streets. All streets within the development are private and are to be maintained by the homeowner's association. Planning Commission 12 April 20, 2006