Lakeville approves garage permit; debates major housing development
The Lakeville Planning Commission unanimously approved a homeowner's request to build a large storage garage on July 18, but spent most of the meeting wrestling with resident concerns about a proposed 176-unit housing development that would force neighborhood traffic onto a private road.
The commission voted 6-0 to approve a conditional use permit for Nic Zev to construct a detached accessory building larger than 2,000 square feet at his home on Klamath Trail. Zev explained his motivation simply: "I live in the house for 12 years and my dream was to build a garage because I have two car garage but only one car can fit in there." A neighbor, Curtis Schols, spoke in favor, calling it a positive improvement in a neighborhood built in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Staff will tie approval to the building permit, ensuring the new structure's exterior materials match the existing house before construction begins.
The more contentious issue was the Sundance Lakeville Second Edition development, which would add 167 townhomes and 9 single-family homes to the area. The commission voted 6-0 to close the public hearing, though the actual project vote was postponed. Residents packed the meeting with concerns, primarily about a Dakota County requirement that would close off a left-turn from Kendale Drive onto County Road 46, forcing neighborhood traffic through the development's private road instead.
Resident Amy Kenra expressed the core worry: "We would be at their mercy and there would be nothing that we could do about it at that time. It would be a huge mistake to close off our public access to go east on County Road 46." Others raised concerns about safety near the Buck Hill ski resort, the road's proximity to townhomes, and whether the development aligned with the city's comprehensive plan.
Developer representatives clarified that the private road would have a public easement, preventing them from arbitrarily restricting access or adding speed bumps. Traffic engineers defended their study methodology, stating the intersections could handle projected traffic. Commission Chair rebuked one speaker for generalizing renters negatively, emphasizing respectful discourse. The project will return for further consideration, with the commission and city attorney continuing to review the proposal's details.
Our proprietary artificial intelligence agent analyzed publicly available documents including meeting agendas, minutes, and transcripts to write this story to help inform local residents. Feedback helps us improve, so please consider rating how we did with the thumbs up or down below.
Go deeper on this topic
Research related meeting documents and build a brief — without rewriting the story.
Full analysis
Votes (2)
Conditional Use Permit for Nicolay Zev
Dissent: None
Moved by Kusa [18:31] · Seconded by Swanson [18:48]
The applicant, Nic Zev, sought a conditional use permit to construct a detached accessory building larger than 2,000 square feet and to have multiple detached accessory buildings on his RS1 zoned property, citing a need for storage for recreational vehicles. Staff highlighted the property's location in the Shoreland overlay District and requirements for matching the building's exterior materials to the main house. A neighbor supported the project as a positive improvement. The commission discussed the process for ensuring material compliance prior to City Council review.
Sundance Lakeville Second Edition: Preliminary Plat & Conditional Use Permit
Dissent: None (for closing the public hearing). The item itself was not voted on during this session.
Moved by Kusa [1:58:08] · Seconded by Hinsley [1:58:10]
The developer presented the Sundance Lakeville Second Edition, a high-density rental and single-family home development. Residents expressed widespread concern, primarily about the Dakota County Planning Commission's policy to restrict left turns from Kendale Drive onto County Road 46, forcing traffic through a proposed private road within the development to access Buck Hill Road. Specific concerns included traffic congestion, safety (especially near Buck Hill ski resort and during car events), emergency vehicle access, snow plowing responsibilities, enforcement on a private road, the proximity of new buildings to existing homes, potential loss of natural screening, storm water management, and compliance with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan regarding transit-oriented development density. The developer clarified that the private road would have a public easement, preventing them from unilaterally restricting access or adding speed bumps, and that the city could potentially handle snow removal. Traffic engineers defended the study methodology and stated intersections could handle the projected traffic, noting the left-turn restriction was a county requirement.
Notable Quotes (10)
I live in the house for 12 years and my dream was to build a garage because I have two car garage but only one car can fit in there.
I just want to speak in favor of of Nick doing the building um like he mentioned it will help get some of his toys off of um his uh driveway in space and I just think that we're in a um neighborhood that's you know late 70s early 80s and not a lot of people are doing improvements and it's good to see um neighbors doing some improvements to their property so I appreciate that.
I have no problem working with the applicant on this I've been working with them for a long time on this um the other thing is that we can tie it to the building permit you know we won't issue the permit until there's a clear understanding that the building will that's being constructed now will match the house given a certain amount of time so it doesn't go on while they're deciding how to paint the house it is important that these buildings be as close as possible...
This is kind of a reintroduction of this project that was uh had a comp plan Amendment and a resoning back in November of 2023 so uh I'll try to keep it brief tonight I know um Mr Dempsey is going to cover a lot of this in a staff report but um it's a 14.74% 76 total units 167 um stacked flats and nine single family homes along with a 5,000 ft amenity space...
My concern is closing off the ability to exit Kendale going south and making a left turn onto County Road 46 this is a public road and the primary thoroughfare for residents in the neighborhood to take this way to go East to 46 and to access Highway 35... We would be at their mercy and there would be nothing that we could do about it at that time it would be a huge mistake to close off our public ass access to go east on County Road 46.
I for one do not not want to I understand it's 32 ft wide which is the same as our street Although our subdivision the right of way is 60 ft so the city the dedicated City Road is 60 feet even though the physical road is 32 feet and that pushes back our setbacks so our houses are farther away from the public road here you have a 32t driving surface which I agree is sufficient but we're you know 12 13 15 ft from the front door I don't want to drive through a subdivision or a townhouse situation with young children and there's there's also four driveways or side streets that I'm assuming people will have to stop at a stop sign if they stop.
I'm sorry I your generalizations have actually been pretty upsetting and I I know that you're frustrated I can hear that but I don't appreciate that you're generalizing people people who rent as in a bucket of sketchy people and those people so again I understand you're frustrated but that's not a broad generalization okay.
I asked them I said hey you know did did the folks at Timberland contact you uh for vegetation management and they said they had not had a call... Michelle McDonald and she had mentioned that 10 feet is not enough uh setback for a 69 kV line...
So it's a private road but it's got a public ement on it so the city is a party to this agreement the City attorney has been through that agreement and picked it apart in detail um so for instance we can't just decide to shut down access to the public we can't just put speed bumps in we can't just at our discretion decide we're just going to shut the road down we can't do it um because of it's a public public easement.
Although the data when we actually analyze it is yes from one day um we're always looking historical data and data on all the roadways to make sure that that one day accurately reflects the majority of days out there.
Ordinances & Resolutions (10)
Permit type requested for the detached accessory building and for multifamily dwellings in Sundance Lakeville.
Application for the layout of lots and common areas for Sundance Lakeville Second Edition.
Minutes from a previous meeting, approved at the start of this meeting.
Specific plan discussed in announcements and public hearing.
Amendment related to the rezoning of the Sundance Lakeville property, approved in November 2023.
Current zoning district for the multifamily portion of Sundance Lakeville.
Zoning for a portion of the Sundance Lakeville property and adjacent areas.
Report commissioned for the Sundance Lakeville development, evaluating traffic impacts and road changes.
Reports containing stipulations and findings for the Sundance Lakeville development.
City's long-range development plan, referenced by a resident concerning density requirements near transit nodes.
Source document
Was this story helpful?
Other Topics from This Document
Sundance Lakeville Second Edition Development
Want to know when new stories arrive?
Enter your email to receive updates.
We will not use your email for any other purpose. You can unsubscribe at any time.