Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/04/1996

Home

CASE #: ~ REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF PONDVIEW; CASE OF GOOD VALUE HOMES By: Zoning Administrator Sylvia Frolik Background: As you rex:alli the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and recommended that City Council gran~ preliminary plat approval to Pondview. The preliminary plat recommended for approval consisted of 149 lots with two accesses onto C.S.A.H. #116 and one access onto C.S.A.H. #5~. The Planning Commission also recommended that Limonite Street not be constructed al a through street north into Peltzer Addition. However, a trail corridor was provided from the term!nus of Limonite north to 149th. Observations: The preliminqry plat and rezoning request were submitted to City Council on January 23. At that time, Council[ introduced an ordinance to rezone the property with some expression of concern. Based on their request for additional information to support the rezoning, the request for preliminary plttt approval was tabled until thc rezoning issue was resolved. On February ~ 3, City Staff presented Council with thc requested information surrounding the rezoning reqlest. At that time, the Developer presented Council with a modification to the rezoning request that reduced the amount of prolxa'ty to be rezoned to residential and retained some industrial progeny adjacent to #56. Along with the rezoning modification, the Developer made some design riaodifications to the plat which consisted of dead ending 147th Avenue at the east boundary of ~e industrial parcel and extending Limonite Street north into Peltzer Addition as a through street~ After a lengthy., discussion, the City Council directed that the revision to the preliminary plat be sent back to the Plknning Commission for additional hearings and review. It appeared that Council unanimously ~tgreed that 147th should be extended as origianlly proposed to intersect with C.S.A.H. #56.[ There were differeing opinions regarding whether or not Limonite Street should be extended in~,o Peltzer Addition as a through street. Councilmember Zimmerman requested that the Planning O_.ommission reconsider whether or not the extension of Limonite Street as a through street will be a[benefit in extending municipal utilities to the north in the future. Subsequent tolthe Council meeting on February 13, 1996, the Developer did provide City Staff with another r~vision to the preliminary plat that reinstitutes 147th as a through street to C.S.A.H. #56. . The Anoka County Highway Department was provided with a copy of the revised preliminary plat for review and;', comment. In earlier conversations with the County, Staff was informed that the County wouldibe opposed to adding any additional traffic to the 149th/#56 intersection by the development Of Limonite Street as a through street to 149th because of the deficiency in sight distance requirements at 149th and #56. In the letter received from the County on February 16, 1996, it appeart; that they are now taking the position that with some clearing clearing and grading, the extension ~ Limonite Street to 149th would not have an adverse impact on the intersection of 149th and #56.i The County has also commented that the location of Hematite's intersection with #116 still does hot meet Case V sight distance requirements. The developer will be communicating with the Count~ and presenting a solution to the Planning Commission at this meeting.