Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Woestehoff agreed that there was a lot of public feedback received in regard to <br /> the development itself and therefore he would want the input from the neighbors on this element <br /> as well. He asked if the marina categorization would require a change in zoning. <br /> City Planner Anderson replied that there would not be a change in zoning as it would be tied to <br /> private property owned by the HOA and would instead follow what the association up river did, <br /> creating a dock association with its own covenants. He stated that he did not believe there would <br /> be an intent to convert the dock to a commercial marina. He noted that if this moves forward to a <br /> formal request, a public hearing would be required for the Conditional Use Permit and advised <br /> that the notification area could be extended. He noted that conditions could be placed in a CUP <br /> that would prevent the dock from commercial activity. <br /> Chairperson Bauer provided background information on a shared dock concept that he <br /> participated in years ago when he lived further north. <br /> 6.02: Review Updated Sketch Plan of Garden View Villas (Project 19-136) <br /> Presentation <br /> Senior Planner McGuire Brigl presented the Staff Report stating that staff recommends that the <br /> Commission provide input to the applicant on the revised sketch plan. This could include, but is <br /> not limited to identifying any red flags, noting any potential concerns, and providing the <br /> applicant direction to invest in a Preliminary Plat. <br /> Commission Business <br /> Commissioner Anderson asked the concern of public safety with the driveways. <br /> Senior Planner McGuire Brigl replied that individual driveways onto the road increases the <br /> possibility of accidents and prefer driveways onto a frontage road for townhome products. She <br /> noted that it was a comment and not a requirement as it is not uncommon for single family <br /> homes to have driveways onto the road. She stated that as proposed it would meet the standards <br /> and the comment was simply made as a suggestion. <br /> Darren Lazan, applicant, stated that they made a full Preliminary Plat application, but staff <br /> believed it would be better to bring this forward as a Sketch Plan to gather input. He stated that <br /> originally this was a townhome development, but the constraints associated with the parcel and <br /> the requirements of the Code, put significant constraints on the project and therefore a fully <br /> conforming single-family plat was developed. He stated that this application should be <br /> considered as any other single-family subdivision plat. He referenced the landscaping comment <br /> from the staff report related to the requirement for the developer to install the landscaping. He <br /> explained that there is no opportunity for a developer to landscape as the lots will be constructed <br /> singly instead of as a whole development and therefore grading would occur and irrigation would <br /> not be available for landscaping to be provided by the developer. He noted that while it may not <br /> Planning Commission/June 4,2020 <br /> Page 12 of 18 <br />