[0:04] [Music]

[0:56] i call the May 22nd planning commission

[0:59] meeting to order and would ask all the

[1:02] commissioners to everyone to stand for

[1:03] the pledge of allegiance

[1:08] to the flag of the United States of

[1:12] America stands

[1:18] nationisible for all

[1:25] miss Eric will you please take the role

[1:28] please traffus here palooa here

[1:32] zemerank Swainy

[1:38] Thank you the next item on the agenda is

[1:40] the approval of the minutes does anyone

[1:41] have any changes for the May 8th

[1:46] minutes if uh none then we'll let that

[1:49] stand uh I would ask Miss Jensen if we

[1:52] have any special announcements for

[1:54] tonight thank you Chair Zimmer uh before

[1:57] you you have the draft minutes from last

[1:58] night's parks Recreation and Natural

[2:00] Resources Committee uh with comments

[2:02] about the reserve at Cedar Creek uh

[2:04] agenda item uh tonight's items will move

[2:08] forward to June 2nd if they are not

[2:10] tabled and we have no agenda items for

[2:13] our next planning commission so June 5th

[2:15] will

[2:17] begin excellent thank you so much uh the

[2:21] next item on the agenda is uh Dr horton

[2:25] uh public hearing to consider a variance

[2:27] to the minimum required area and minimum

[2:30] width of an attached garage of a single

[2:33] family home located at

[2:36] 4824 171st Street West and I believe we

[2:40] have

[2:41] uh Mr eric Gamrat here on behalf of Dr

[2:46] hort

[3:36] thank you very

[3:38] much i did notice that thank

[3:41] you have Miss Jensen to present uh on

[3:45] behalf of the

[3:48] city there we go all right good evening

[3:53] commissioners this is a variance request

[3:55] for garage size in the Brookshire

[3:57] development

[3:59] uh its location is on as we've said 4824

[4:02] 171st Street um which is just south of

[4:06] 170th Street and west of the city

[4:08] boundary with uh Empire south of U

[4:12] Branch and Farm for general reference uh

[4:16] this is the survey of the the property

[4:19] um I know it's kind of a little tough to

[4:21] read but it does um tell us here that it

[4:24] is a slab on grade home um some of you

[4:28] were on the commission when Brookshshire

[4:29] was reviewed and approved they received

[4:32] a a cup so that um a number of the lots

[4:35] within the development can be a reduced

[4:38] lot width to provide for additional lot

[4:40] size variety so this is one of those

[4:42] lots um that was allowed to be um just a

[4:47] with a minimum lot width of 55 feet

[4:50] instead of 70 um so it is uh narrower

[4:54] than we typically see for single family

[4:57] um but you can also see that there is uh

[5:00] it looks like 10-ft setbacks on either

[5:03] side and the district does have um 7

[5:06] foot sideyard setbacks so

[5:09] uh this is the floor plan uh for the

[5:12] garage or for the the home excuse me

[5:15] showing the garage and it's a little

[5:17] tough to read this but um the home or

[5:20] the garage as it was constructed has an

[5:22] interior area of 481 square feet and a

[5:26] width of 20 ft um our ordinance does

[5:30] require for homes without a basement for

[5:32] single family homes that the minimum

[5:34] garage be 540 square feet and 22 feet in

[5:37] width um Dr horton submitted uh a

[5:42] building permit for this home um and

[5:45] there was an error made in the the home

[5:47] design it did not include um the

[5:49] additional five- foot bumpout that that

[5:52] should have been there to to meet these

[5:54] requirements when city inspection staff

[5:56] reviewed it unfortunately they missed

[5:58] that that part was missing as well um

[6:01] and then the building permit was

[6:02] approved the home was constructed and um

[6:06] it was conveyed to the property owners

[6:08] in March after which time they realized

[6:10] that um it did not uh they inquired with

[6:14] city staff about you know what the

[6:16] minimum size were and that's when we

[6:17] discovered the the error um I did work

[6:20] with building inspection staff to go

[6:22] back and look at other similar uh lots

[6:24] within the Brookshshire development and

[6:26] we did confirm that there are no other

[6:28] lots that have been issued with permits

[6:31] um that do not meet our minimum

[6:32] requirements so this thankfully is the

[6:34] only one um unfortunately that we we did

[6:38] have it but there there are not others

[6:40] that were constructed that did not meet

[6:42] um our

[6:44] requirements so um in a in an effort to

[6:49] ensure that the the homeowners have a

[6:52] home that is uh legal and conforming um

[6:56] we brought forward this variance after

[6:58] the fact um if approved it would be uh

[7:02] recorded against the property for that

[7:04] so um any future buyers or anyone would

[7:08] see that despite the the garage size and

[7:11] width it is considered a legal

[7:13] conforming structure

[7:15] uh so staff does recommend approval of

[7:17] this variance uh and adopt the findings

[7:20] of fact as presented and I will stand

[7:22] for any questions you may have thank you

[7:27] uh this is a public hearing and if you

[7:30] would like to testify please write your

[7:32] name on the list at the back of the room

[7:35] and um now would be the time to come

[7:38] forward if you do have uh questions or

[7:41] you do want to testify at the public

[7:43] hearing

[7:56] we would ask that you state your name

[7:57] and address for the record my name is

[8:01] Julie Clug and we're at 17229 Durham

[8:05] Drive in Lakeville at the Brookshshire

[8:08] development and actually our yard is

[8:12] attached to their yard very nice couple

[8:15] um my question is this i tried to find

[8:18] the information before we came after we

[8:20] got the notice and my question is this

[8:23] so are you ask are is it being asked

[8:27] that space be added to the house or that

[8:31] it just be legalized or approved as is

[8:35] what our question is great thank you we

[8:39] will be sure to have staff answer that

[8:41] question okay i think we all know the

[8:43] answer but I think it's important to

[8:44] have it be official yeah because we want

[8:46] to know because it affects our yard sure

[8:49] i mean in the swale drainage etc etc etc

[8:54] and we just wanted to know thank you

[9:00] is there anyone else that would like to

[9:02] speak

[9:06] madam Chair Commissioner Kuza seeing no

[9:08] one else come forward I move to close

[9:10] the public hearing second all those in

[9:12] favor i I public hearing is now closed

[9:17] um we will address questions and I'll

[9:20] ask staff to respond to one question we

[9:22] had thank you Chair Zimmer um yes we are

[9:25] uh with this process uh legalizing the

[9:28] garage as constructed um the homeowners

[9:32] should they choose in the future to add

[9:34] on to the garage they would have that

[9:35] ability to do so um but with this

[9:38] variance that their structure would be

[9:40] considered legal and conforming and they

[9:42] would not be required to add additional

[9:44] space to their garage excellent thank

[9:46] you so

[9:48] much now we're open for questions from

[9:50] commissioners

[9:54] uh Commissioner Travis uh my my question

[9:57] was was there any thought given to

[9:59] simply fixing the garage now as opposed

[10:07] um I can let the representatives from Dr

[10:09] horton explain better from my

[10:11] understanding once the home has been uh

[10:14] conveyed to the property owner um then

[10:17] it's um no longer Dr horton having the

[10:20] ability to just go in and and add on to

[10:23] that um if it had been discovered you

[10:27] know earlier in the process or during

[10:29] construction perhaps there may have been

[10:31] some ability but in this case the home

[10:33] has been conveyed to the property owners

[10:36] um so we don't really have the ability

[10:38] to require that um to be done thank you

[10:45] Madam Chair please go ahead Mr cla um

[10:48] for variances there's kind of a list of

[10:51] requirements in state law that you have

[10:53] to meet for them and this is kind of the

[10:56] reason why we have variances so uh this

[10:59] totally fits within um uh those legal

[11:04] requirements and

[11:07] uh I'm supportive of the granting this

[11:09] variance so that you know they they can

[11:12] enjoy their home as as they built it and

[11:15] um not have to worry about it if they

[11:18] ever want to sell in the future

[11:24] any other comments

[11:28] and I believe we're ready for a motion

[11:34] motion to recommend to city council

[11:36] approval of the variance uh for an

[11:39] attached garage less than 540 square ft

[11:42] and a width of less than 22 uh feet for

[11:46] a home at

[11:48] 4824 171st Street second

[11:54] uh thank you very much uh Miss Ericson

[11:57] would you take the role

[12:00] trafice hi hi Zimmer i Ike hi Swaney hi

[12:06] Tinsley hi

[12:09] thank you uh I think that's the first

[12:11] time in my experience that Steph has

[12:12] made an error so I'm glad to see we're

[12:15] able to remedy it here and uh make it

[12:18] work out for everybody thank you so much

[12:19] for your patience with

[12:22] us next item on the agenda is

[12:26] um reserve at Cedar Creek again this is

[12:30] a public hearing to consider the

[12:31] application of a reserve at Cedar Creek

[12:34] LLC for a preliminary plat of 48 single

[12:37] family lots to be known as reserve at

[12:39] Cedar Creek and the vacation of public

[12:42] roadway drainage and utility easements

[12:45] we have Mr john Anderson uh here to

[12:50] present on behalf of the

[12:57] applicant please identify yourself for

[12:59] the record and uh go ahead yeah good

[13:01] evening my name is John Anderson i

[13:03] represent Brandle Anderson Homes and

[13:05] Chris Contrarus is also here in the

[13:07] audience with Brandle Anderson Homes and

[13:09] we are proposing the reserve at Cedar

[13:11] Creek it's a 48 lot single family

[13:13] subdivision um it is uh north of County

[13:17] Road 50 or 202nd Street and south of 200

[13:20] Street uh directly west of the villas at

[13:22] Cedar Creek Development that Summergate

[13:24] Development has developed uh there's two

[13:26] properties involved two 10acre parcels

[13:28] so two different land owners and uh the

[13:31] plan is to come forward and uh get this

[13:34] approved here this summer and construct

[13:36] it grade it build the streets and have

[13:38] building permits uh ready to go by fall

[13:40] um the lots meet all the zoning

[13:43] requirements for the current zoning

[13:44] district and uh we've gone through you

[13:47] know some substantial review as far as

[13:49] the grading plans and things like that

[13:51] and staff will probably touch on it but

[13:53] there's also a flood plane study um

[13:55] adjacent to us uh where a creek kind of

[13:57] runs in that area and that will be put

[13:59] into an outlaw and deed to the city and

[14:01] preserved for future um open space i

[14:04] guess there's also two storm water ponds

[14:07] on the property they'll also be in the

[14:08] outlots that'll be deeded to the city

[14:11] and I guess uh uh we plan on building

[14:13] all these lots um ourselves at this

[14:15] point and uh there won't be any um HOA

[14:19] for the neighborhood but there will be

[14:20] covenants recorded against the lots but

[14:23] no association dues or homeowners

[14:25] association and um as I said uh once we

[14:28] receive plary plat approval uh we're

[14:29] going to go right into the final plat

[14:31] submittal and try to get a grading

[14:32] permit and start grading and tree

[14:34] clearing and demoing the structures out

[14:35] there so if you have any questions we'll

[14:37] be here excellent thank you so much

[14:40] thank you next we'll ask uh our staff

[14:44] Miss Johnson to present

[14:47] hello commissioners um as Mr anderson

[14:51] said this is the reserve at Cedar Creek

[14:53] Preliminary Plat and Easement Vacation

[14:56] uh it is located north of 202nd Street

[14:59] which is also uh County Road 50 just

[15:02] east of city hall here between Glen

[15:04] Brook Path which is in the Cedar Creek

[15:07] Villas development and Hamburg

[15:10] Avenue uh the two parcels are zoned RST2

[15:13] which is uh what many of them are in

[15:16] that area that uh district does allow

[15:18] single family detached town homes and

[15:20] twin homes

[15:23] uh this is the uh easements area that is

[15:26] proposed to be um vacated um it is over

[15:31] the roadway area as well as over the

[15:34] creek um the road uh easement is no

[15:37] longer needed as it will be platted as

[15:39] rightway um the majority of the creek

[15:43] will be uh within an outlot that comes

[15:45] to the city and with the uh LOMAR the

[15:49] letter of map revision that was recently

[15:51] approved by FEMA for the creek um this

[15:54] sliver of the easement up here that's

[15:56] shown on these lots is no longer

[15:58] required because the the map revision

[16:00] has shown um that that is no longer a

[16:03] part of that floodway so that is

[16:06] um that is coming off of those lots um

[16:10] as is no longer

[16:11] needed um this is the existing

[16:14] conditions it's a little tough to tell

[16:17] but we have 200th Street here 202 at the

[16:20] south there's a single family home on

[16:23] each

[16:26] parcel and then this is the proposed

[16:28] preliminary plat um there's no direct

[16:32] access to either 22nd Street or 200th

[16:35] from uh this subdivision uh the the um

[16:40] streets will be extended from the the

[16:43] Cedar Creek Villas to the east and

[16:46] through this development with a a

[16:48] potential future extension here for the

[16:50] property to the

[16:52] west uh tree preservation this is the

[16:55] the plan that identified the the trees

[16:58] that are um on the site 857 of them um

[17:03] we did share with you the the minutes

[17:05] the draft minutes from park and wreck

[17:06] last evening they had quite a discussion

[17:08] on uh the tree removal proposed for this

[17:12] site um understanding that our current

[17:16] uh tree preservation ordinance um does

[17:19] not prohibit the removal of these trees

[17:22] um and their committee did unanimously

[17:24] recommend approval of it however they

[17:26] did add language encouraging the

[17:29] developer to see if any of these trees

[17:31] could be preserved and or adding um

[17:35] additional trees back onto the site um

[17:39] this is a little tough to tell but it is

[17:41] the landscape plan i just wanted to

[17:44] point out for you

[17:47] um the they are proposing trees along

[17:50] this north side the the units that back

[17:52] up to 200 Street do not aren't required

[17:54] to have a buffer yard 200th Street is a

[17:57] m is a minor collector roadway where we

[18:00] do not require

[18:02] um buffer yard

[18:03] plantings and then um at the south end

[18:07] here these units these lots here abut

[18:10] the storm water pond which then abuts

[18:12] 202nd Street so those units are not

[18:14] required to have um buffer plantings

[18:18] either but the developer is proposing

[18:20] some plantings in that area um the other

[18:23] area that the park and recck group

[18:24] talked about um was plantings along this

[18:27] west side we don't require um like uses

[18:30] to have buffer from each other so single

[18:32] family to single family would not be

[18:34] required to have a landscape buffer

[18:36] certainly those future homeowners will

[18:38] be free to plant in that area um if they

[18:41] would like

[18:43] so that is just a summary of that um

[18:46] that is all I have for you tonight um if

[18:49] uh the commission does uh choose to

[18:51] recommend approval to the city council

[18:54] staff does uh recommend that it be

[18:56] subject to the seven stipulations that

[18:58] were listed in the planning report and

[18:59] I'll stand for any questions you may

[19:01] have

[19:03] thank you i'll reiterate that this is a

[19:05] public hearing and if there's anyone

[19:06] that wants to come forward on this issue

[19:09] uh that now would be the time

[19:15] seeing no one coming forward time for a

[19:18] motion

[19:20] madam chair I uh move to close the

[19:22] public hearing

[19:24] second

[19:26] motion having been moved and seconded

[19:29] all those in favor i I

[19:32] opposed uh the public hearing is now

[19:35] closed

[19:38] um now we're open for questions from any

[19:44] commissioners uh Madam Chair

[19:47] Commissioner Travis um when I went to

[19:50] look at the site um on 202nd Street

[19:53] there's a a sign um for sale 10 acres i

[19:57] was just wondering if that 10 acres is

[20:00] somehow related to these uh to the

[20:03] subdivision of 48 Homes is that is that

[20:05] for sale sign include is it a different

[20:07] 10 acres i guess

[20:12] it looks like the answer is no

[20:16] or was that a yes sorry I was looking

[20:19] the other direction sign that

[20:20] Commissioner Travis saw is for the the

[20:22] south parcel that is being developed as

[20:25] reserve Cedar Creek that's the So it's

[20:27] this it's the southern half of the

[20:30] subdivision that's the for sale sign is

[20:32] is on that current property right now i

[20:35] saw the sign and it said under contract

[20:37] so I Okay I made that assumption that it

[20:41] was moving along um I would have one

[20:44] question if nobody else does if I can

[20:46] ask um the city line or the outlot that

[20:50] has the creek on it that is going to be

[20:53] is that deed to the city and then the

[20:55] city's going to do the maintenance for

[20:56] the Yes it will be the city's area to

[20:59] maintain so the city have requirements

[21:02] for um landscaping for that area no the

[21:07] the trees that are within that area are

[21:09] being um maintained on the site i think

[21:12] there's maybe one that's being removed

[21:14] if I recall correctly it was nearly dead

[21:17] or or heavily you know it had emerald

[21:20] ash or something to that effect so we

[21:22] would want that one removed but the the

[21:23] remainder of the trees in that area are

[21:25] being maintained on site

[21:28] very good thank

[21:30] you any other questions

[21:35] madam Chair Commissioner Kuza I move to

[21:38] recommend it to the city council

[21:40] approval of the reserve at Cedar Creek

[21:42] preliminary plat and easement vacation

[21:44] subject to the seven stipulations listed

[21:47] in the May 13 2025 planning report i'll

[21:50] second that

[21:52] motion having been moved and seconded

[21:54] Miss uh Ericson will you take the role

[21:56] please

[21:58] kuza Zimmer I I

[22:03] Tinsley I Travis

[22:08] thank you motion prevails we appreciate

[22:11] your investment in Lakeville and thank

[22:13] you for all your work

[22:16] uh next item is staff notices which I

[22:19] think we already received and uh just to

[22:22] reiterate that there is uh no meeting on

[22:25] June 5th for the planning commission so

[22:29] feel free to take the night off uh with

[22:33] that I don't think that we have any

[22:34] other

[22:35] business meeting is adjourned