Laserfiche WebLink
MCPA guidelines for managing the landfill, the area identified as High density on the south would <br />take a considerable investment to remediation to allow for development. Because of this, the plan <br />is proposing majority of the development on the north side of the parcel. This area is currently <br />guided Urban Low density (3-8 units/acre). A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required to re- <br />guide the 5 acres that are currently classified as Urban Low to Urban High. Additional information <br />from the applicant regarding the wetland, floodplain and MPCA requirements must be submitted <br />with a formal Preliminary Plat/ Comp Plan Amendment application to complete a formal analysis <br />of the density calculations for the site. Any impacts to wetland and floodplain may trigger the need <br />for additional approvals and/or mitigation. Based on the submitted information staff believes the <br />proposed density will conform to the city's overall density requirement of 3.0 units per acre. <br /> <br />A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required to change the Urban Low land use guidance to <br />Urban High to support the proposed development. The project is anticipated to be rezoned and <br />developed as a Residential Planned Unit Development (“RPUD”) to support a development that <br />matches the Comprehensive Plan guidance. Rezoning the property to a RPUD district supports <br />proposed densities and will provide the Council with the flexibility to deviate from the standards <br />outlined such as allowing a 35 foot front setback where a 50' setback is standard. The council <br />should review the proposal and consider their willingness to rezone the property to RPUD to allow <br />for flexible zoning. <br />4.Planning Commission Vote and Comment: <br />The Planning Commission reviewed the application at the January 16th, 2024 meeting (minutes <br />linked). The commission was supportive of the single-family one-level-living-style condos to <br />support life-cycle housing and the proposed residential look of the buildings. There was discussion <br />regarding coordination with other agencies including MPCA to address the contaminated soil, <br />Hennepin County for access, and Met Council to address any density requirements. The <br />Commission had positive feedback for the proposed project. <br />5.Staff Recommendation: <br />I recommend Council review the proposed concept plan for a 154 unit condo development and <br />provide nonbinding feedback to the applicant for preparation of a formal preliminary plat <br />application. <br /> <br />The Council should discuss the followings: <br />1. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Comprehensive Plan Amendment would be required to <br />change the Urban Low land use guidance to Urban High to support the proposed <br />development. Does the council find the change appropriate? <br />2. Rezoning to RPUD- The council should review the proposal and consider their willingness <br />to rezone the property to allow some flexible zoning. <br />3. Landfill- This is a unique development being proposed on a site with contaminated soil. Are <br />there concerns or specific questions the applicant should address regarding the management <br />of the landfill as part of a formal development application? <br />4. Design- The applicant has proposed a residential style architecture for 7 condo buildings. Is <br />the design appropriate and in character with the area? <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED <br />Review the proposed concept plan and provide feedback to the applicant. <br />Exhibits <br />Exhibit A. Eisinger Meadows Concept Plan 1.16.24 <br />142