Laserfiche WebLink
, „ K <br /> 15-3739 <br /> May 18,2015 <br /> Page 9 of 9 <br /> Summary af Issues for Discussion <br /> l. Has the applicant demonstrated via the submitted Conservation Design Report and <br /> through other methods that there is justification for the proposed impacts to the Big <br /> Woods portion of the pmperty? <br /> 2. Are �the proposed design and preservation measures as proposed in the draft Covenant <br /> Document (Exhibit G-� adequate to protect the site environmental elements of <br /> importance? <br /> 3. Are thexe any other concerns that need to be addressed? <br /> Staff Recommendation <br /> 1. Applicant should be advised to address the i�tems detailed in the City Engineer's comments. <br /> 2. Preliminary plat review should not mave foz�ward untiUunless documentation is provided <br /> confirming that the MCWD has approved the wetland delineation boundaries. <br /> 3. It is recommended that specific driveway corridors for all 9 of the easterly lats be shown on <br /> the preliminazy plat drawing, as each site has trees, wetlands or topography that may impact <br /> or could be impacted by driveway locations. <br /> Planning Commission should hold the Public Hearing and receive comments from the public. <br /> Discussion o£the above issues and any conclusions reached by the Planning Commission should <br /> provide applicant and staff with clirection as to whether ar how the proposed plat should be <br /> revised. Any remaining topics left unaddressed to date should be brought up for discussion. <br /> Qptions for action include: <br /> -Table fox further revisions and consideration(provide applicant dixection), <br /> -Recommend approval or conditional approval for the preliminary pla�. <br /> -Recommend denial, stating reasons. <br /> - Other <br />