Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Motion by Commissiclner Deemer and seconded by Commissioner LaDue to recommend that City <br />Council approve the rqxluest from Super Bowl, Inc. to rezone Lot 6, Block 4, Riverside West to R- <br />1 Urban Residential. ' <br /> <br />Motion carried. Votiqg Yes: Chairperson Bawden, Commissioners Deemer, LaDue, Hendriksen, <br />Holland, Terry, and Thorud. Voting No: None. <br /> <br /> Case #4: Requ~t for Preliminary Plat Approval of Fox Knoll; Case of Rick <br /> Murray, Residential Development Company, and Mark Kleckner, Fox <br /> DevelOpment Co. <br /> Zoning Administrato~ Frolik stated that Rick Murray of Residential Development Company is <br /> requesting prelimin .ar~ plat approval of Fox Knoll, which consists of 23 acres to be subdivided <br /> into 22 lots. She advised that all lots exceed the minimum area and dimensional requirements. <br /> <br /> Noting that the Park C; ommission met on March 8 and determined park dedication to consist of a <br />- combination of trail {[evelopment and cash, Chairperson Bawden inquired whether City Staff's <br /> recommendation to re. gli~ the wail was after-the-fact. <br /> <br /> City Engineer JankoWski stated that the Ramsey Elementary School expressed concern over the <br /> location of the park trail. <br /> <br />City Adminiswator Schroeder conf'amed that representatives of the school were concerned that any <br />trail coming from Fo~ Knoll over to their property would negatively affect their Environmental <br />Learning Area (ELA)i If such a trail is a detriment to their facility, City Staff would recommend <br />running the trail parallel with 151st Lane. <br /> <br /> I <br /> I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />! <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Applicant Rick Murray stated he has no objections to the City Staff review letter. He commented <br />that the subdivision ~ould benefit from additional space acquired if the wail was realigned to run <br />parallel to 151st Lane~ but that he had no strong feelings either way. <br /> <br />~bmmissioner Hollagd inquired about the piece of property Mr. Tom Kurak mentioned at the <br />public hearing as poss!bly being included in the plat. <br /> <br />Mr. Jankowski explaiped that it is a triangular piece of property which abuts thc southern portion <br />of this parcel, howevetr it would not mean the creation of additional lots but would enhance the lots <br />proposed. <br /> <br />Mr. Kurak stated he a~uclpates the City condemning this comer of his property for utility easement <br />and since he would lille to receive full value for the property, he would rather have the City adopt a <br />plat for this area whid..h takes advantage of this high ground. He suggested bringing a cul-de-sac <br />south and developing mother three lots. ' <br /> <br />Upon inquiry from th_~ Commission, Mr. Schroeder stated he didn't think the City had a particular <br />opinion regarding Mr~ Kurak'.s s~ggestion. <br />Discussion ensued regarding the alignment of water and sewer and how it will impact the school <br />property and the ELA.~ <br /> <br />In reference to Mr. Karak's suggestion, Mr. Murray stated he is very willing to consider acquiring <br />additional land if he i~ able to obtain more lots; if not, he is not interested in an additional expense <br />just to enhance the nu~nber of lots currently proposed. He objected to delaying the preliminary plat <br />approval to consider Kurak's proposal, as he is on a tight schedule to accommodate the upcoming <br />Parade of Homes. <br /> <br />Planning <br /> <br />Commission/April 4, 1995 <br /> Page 6 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />