[Music] I call the May 22nd planning commission meeting to order and would ask all the commissioners to everyone to stand for the pledge of allegiance. To the flag of the United States of
America stands nationisible for all. Miss Eric, will you please take the role please? Traffus here. Palooa here. Zemerank Swainy Thank you. The next item on the agenda
is the approval of the minutes. Does anyone have any changes for the May 8th minutes? If uh none, then we'll let that stand. Uh I would ask Miss Jensen if we have any special announcements for tonight. Thank you, Chair Zimmer. Uh before you, you have the draft minutes
from last night's parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Committee uh with comments about the reserve at Cedar Creek uh agenda item. Uh tonight's items will move forward to June 2nd if they are not tabled and we have no agenda items for our next planning commission.
So June 5th will begin. Excellent. Thank you so much. Uh the next item on the agenda is uh Dr. Horton. Uh, public hearing to consider a variance to the minimum required area and minimum width of an attached garage
of a single family home located at 4824 171st Street West. And I believe we have uh Mr. Eric Gamrat here on behalf of Dr. Hort. Thank you very
much. I did notice that. Thank you. Have Miss Jensen to present uh on behalf of the city. There we go. All right. Good evening, commissioners. This is a variance request for garage size in the
Brookshire development. Uh its location is on, as we've said, 4824 171st Street, um which is just south of 170th Street and west of the city boundary with uh Empire, south of U
Branch and Farm for general reference. Uh this is the survey of the the property. Um I know it's kind of a little tough to read, but it does um tell us here that it is a slab on grade home. Um some of you were on the
commission when Brookshshire was reviewed and approved. They received a a cup so that um a number of the lots within the development can be a reduced lot width to provide for additional lot size variety. So this is one of those
lots um that was allowed to be um just a with a minimum lot width of 55 feet instead of 70. Um, so it is uh narrower than we typically see for single family. Um, but you can also see that there is
uh it looks like 10-ft setbacks on either side and the district does have um 7 foot sideyard setbacks. So, uh this is the floor plan uh for the garage or for the the home, excuse me, showing the garage. And it's a little
tough to read this, but um the home or the garage as it was constructed has an interior area of 481 square feet and a width of 20 ft. Um our ordinance does require for homes without a basement for single family homes that the minimum
garage be 540 square feet and 22 feet in width. Um Dr. Horton submitted uh a building permit for this home. Um, and there was an error made in the the home design. It did not include um the additional five- foot bumpout that that
should have been there to to meet these requirements. When city inspection staff reviewed it, unfortunately, they missed that that part was missing as well. Um and then the building permit was approved. The home was constructed and um it was conveyed to the property
owners in March after which time they realized that um it did not uh they inquired with city staff about you know what the minimum size were and that's when we discovered the the error. Um, I did work with building inspection staff to go back and look at other similar uh
lots within the Brookshshire development and we did confirm that there are no other lots that have been issued with permits um that do not meet our minimum requirements. So, this thankfully is the only one um unfortunately that we we did have it, but there there are not others
that were constructed that did not meet um our requirements. So, um, in a in an effort to ensure that the the homeowners have a home that is, uh, legal and conforming,
um, we brought forward this variance after the fact. Um, if approved, it would be, uh, recorded against the property for that. So, um, any future buyers or anyone would see that despite the the garage size and width, it is
considered a legal conforming structure. Uh so staff does recommend approval of this variance uh and adopt the findings of fact as presented and I will stand for any questions you may have. Thank you.
Uh this is a public hearing and if you would like to testify please write your name on the list at the back of the room and um now would be the time to come forward if you do have uh questions or you do want to testify at the public
hearing. We would ask that you state your name and address for the record. My name is Julie Clug and we're at 17229 Durham Drive in Lakeville at the Brookshshire development and actually our yard is
attached to their yard. Very nice couple. Um my question is this. I tried to find the information before we came after we got the notice and my question is this. So, are you ask are is it being asked that space be added to the house
or that it just be legalized or approved as is what our question is. Great. Thank you. We will be sure to have staff answer that question. Okay. I think we all know the answer, but I think it's important to have it be official. Yeah. Because we want to know because it
affects our yard. Sure. I mean, in the swale drainage, etc., etc., etc. And we just wanted to know. Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak? Madam Chair, Commissioner Kuza, seeing
no one else come forward, I move to close the public hearing. Second. All those in favor? I I public hearing is now closed. Um, we will address questions and I'll ask staff to respond to one question we had. Thank you, Chair
Zimmer. Um, yes, we are uh with this process uh legalizing the garage as constructed um the homeowners should they choose in the future to add on to the garage, they would have that ability to do so. Um but with this variance that their structure would be considered
legal and conforming and they would not be required to add additional space to their garage. Excellent. Thank you so much. Now we're open for questions from commissioners. Uh Commissioner Travis, uh my my question was was there any thought given
to simply fixing the garage now as opposed? Um I can let the representatives from Dr. Horton explain better. From my understanding, once the home has been uh conveyed to the property owner, um then
it's um no longer Dr. Horton having the ability to just go in and and add on to that. Um if it had been discovered, you know, earlier in the process or during construction, perhaps there may have been some ability, but in this case, the
home has been conveyed to the property owners. Um, so we don't really have the ability to require that um to be done. Thank you, Madam Chair. Please go ahead, Mr. Cla. Um, for variances, there's kind of a
list of requirements in state law that you have to meet for them. And this is kind of the reason why we have variances. So, uh this totally fits within um uh those legal requirements and
uh I'm supportive of the granting this variance so that you know they they can enjoy their home as as they built it and um not have to worry about it if they ever want to sell in the future. Any other comments?
And I believe we're ready for a motion. Motion to recommend to city council approval of the variance uh for an attached garage less than 540 square ft and a width of less than 22 uh feet for a home at
4824 171st Street. Second. Uh, thank you very much. Uh, Miss Ericson, would you take the role? Trafice. Hi. Hi, Zimmer. I, Ike. Hi, Swaney. Hi, Tinsley. Hi.
Thank you. Uh, I think that's the first time in my experience that Steph has made an error. So, I'm glad to see we're able to remedy it here and, uh, make it work out for everybody. Thank you so much for your patience with us. Next item on the agenda is
um reserve at Cedar Creek. Again, this is a public hearing to consider the application of a reserve at Cedar Creek LLC for a preliminary plat of 48 single family lots to be known as reserve at Cedar Creek and the vacation of public
roadway drainage and utility easements. We have Mr. John Anderson uh here to present on behalf of the applicant. Please identify yourself for the record and uh go ahead. Yeah, good evening. My name is John Anderson. I
represent Brandle Anderson Homes and Chris Contrarus is also here in the audience with Brandle Anderson Homes and we are proposing the reserve at Cedar Creek. It's a 48 lot single family subdivision. Um it is uh north of County Road 50 or 202nd Street and south of 200
Street uh directly west of the villas at Cedar Creek Development that Summergate Development has developed. Uh there's two properties involved, two 10acre parcels, so two different land owners. And uh the plan is to come forward and uh get this approved here this summer
and construct it, grade it, build the streets, and have building permits uh ready to go by fall. Um the lots meet all the zoning requirements for the current zoning district and uh we've gone through you know some substantial review as far as the grading plans and things like that and staff will probably
touch on it but there's also a flood plane study um adjacent to us uh where a creek kind of runs in that area and that will be put into an outlaw and deed to the city and preserved for future um open space. I guess there's also two storm water ponds on the property.
They'll also be in the outlots that'll be deeded to the city. And I guess uh uh we plan on building all these lots um ourselves at this point. And uh there won't be any um HOA for the neighborhood, but there will be covenants recorded against the lots, but
no association dues or homeowners association. And um as I said, uh once we receive plary plat approval, uh we're going to go right into the final plat submittal and try to get a grading permit and start grading and tree clearing and demoing the structures out there. So, if you have any questions, we'll be here. Excellent. Thank you so
much. Thank you. Next, we'll ask uh our staff, Miss Johnson, to present. Hello, commissioners. Um, as Mr. Anderson said, this is the reserve at Cedar Creek Preliminary Plat and Easement Vacation. Uh it is located
north of 202nd Street which is also uh County Road 50 just east of city hall here between Glen Brook Path which is in the Cedar Creek Villas development and Hamburg Avenue. Uh the two parcels are zoned
RST2 which is uh what many of them are in that area. That uh district does allow single family detached town homes and twin homes. Uh this is the uh easements area that is proposed to be um vacated. Um it is over
the roadway area as well as over the creek. Um the road uh easement is no longer needed as it will be platted as rightway. Um the majority of the creek will be uh within an outlot that comes to the city. And with the uh LOMAR, the
letter of map revision that was recently approved by FEMA for the creek, um this sliver of the easement up here that's shown on these lots is no longer required because the the map revision has shown um that that is no longer a part of that floodway. So that is
um that is coming off of those lots um as is no longer needed. Um, this is the existing conditions. It's a little tough to tell, but we have 200th Street here, 202 at the south. There's a single family home
on each parcel. And then this is the proposed preliminary plat. Um, there's no direct access to either 22nd Street or 200th from uh this subdivision. Uh the the um
streets will be extended from the the Cedar Creek Villas to the east and through this development with a a potential future extension here for the property to the west. Uh tree preservation. This is the
the plan that identified the the trees that are um on the site, 857 of them. Um we did share with you the the minutes the draft minutes from park and wreck last evening. They had quite a discussion on uh the tree removal
proposed for this site. Um understanding that our current uh tree preservation ordinance um does not prohibit the removal of these trees. Um and their committee did unanimously recommend approval of it. However, they did add
language encouraging the developer to see if any of these trees could be preserved and or adding um additional trees back onto the site. Um this is a little tough to tell, but it is the landscape plan. I just wanted to point
out for you, um the they are proposing trees along this north side. the the units that back up to 200 Street do not aren't required to have a buffer yard. 200th Street is a m is a minor collector roadway where we
do not require um buffer yard plantings. And then um at the south end here, these units, these lots here abut the storm water pond which then abuts 202nd Street. So those units are not
required to have um buffer plantings either, but the developer is proposing some plantings in that area. Um the other area that the park and recck group talked about um was plantings along this west side. We don't require um like uses to have buffer from each other. So
single family to single family would not be required to have a landscape buffer. Certainly those future homeowners will be free to plant in that area um if they would like. So that is just a summary of that. Um that is all I have for you tonight. Um
if uh the commission does uh choose to recommend approval to the city council staff does uh recommend that it be subject to the seven stipulations that were listed in the planning report and I'll stand for any questions you may have. Thank you. I'll reiterate that this is a
public hearing and if there's anyone that wants to come forward on this issue uh that now would be the time. Seeing no one coming forward, time for a motion. Madam chair, I uh move to close the public hearing.
Second. Motion having been moved and seconded. All those in favor? I I opposed. Uh the public hearing is now closed. Um, now we're open for questions from
any commissioners. Uh, Madam Chair, Commissioner Travis, um, when I went to look at the site um on 202nd Street, there's a a sign um for sale, 10 acres. I was just wondering if that 10 acres is
somehow related to these uh to the subdivision of 48 Homes. Is that is that for sale sign include? Is it a different 10 acres? I guess it looks like the answer is no. Or was that a yes? Sorry, I was looking
the other direction. Sign that Commissioner Travis saw is for the the south parcel that is being developed as reserve Cedar Creek. That's the So, it's this it's the southern half of the subdivision that's the for sale sign is is on that current property right now. I
saw the sign and it said under contract. So, I Okay, I made that assumption that it was moving along. Um I would have one question if nobody else does if I can ask. Um the city line or the outlot that
has the creek on it that is going to be is that deed to the city and then the city's going to do the maintenance for the Yes. It will be the city's area to maintain. So the city have requirements for um landscaping for that area. No,
the the trees that are within that area are being um maintained on the site. I think there's maybe one that's being removed. If I recall correctly, it was nearly dead or or heavily, you know, it had emerald ash or something to that effect. So, we would want that one
removed, but the the remainder of the trees in that area are being maintained on site. Very good. Thank you. Any other questions? Madam Chair, Commissioner Kuza, I move to recommend it to the city council
approval of the reserve at Cedar Creek preliminary plat and easement vacation subject to the seven stipulations listed in the May 13, 2025 planning report. I'll second that motion having been moved and seconded, Miss uh Ericson, will you take the role,
please? Kuza Zimmer I I Tinsley I Travis. Thank you. Motion prevails. We appreciate your investment in Lakeville
and thank you for all your work. Uh next item is staff notices which I think we already received and uh just to reiterate that there is uh no meeting on June 5th for the planning commission. So
feel free to take the night off. Uh with that I don't think that we have any other business. Meeting is adjourned.