11-21-2005 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

. #OS-3131 September 15,2005 Page 3 City En�ineer Conunents 9-13-05. The City Engineer has provided conunents on the revised plans, attached as E�hibit C. His conunents related to engineering mat�ers include the staizdal-d request for pavenlent design and geotecluucal reports,drainage calculations,azld level of detail required in fmal design plaiis. Additionally,lle notes that in order io maintain appropriate freeboa.rd for the walkouts on Lots 8-9-10, the walkotii:elevaiions need to be raised; also, thai the proposed street grades will da111 water on the church property unless road design chailges or a stonn sewer is added. MCWD Comments 8-4-05: The Mirulell�ha Creek Watershed District has concluded(see Exhibit D) that the wetland e�tension in Lot 8 is not "incidental", and therefore is regt.ilated tuider WCA rules. Applicant is apparently proposing to fill 1600 s.f. of i;hai wetlailci to gain niore buildable area within Lot 8. Wetland Ord'uiance Impacts. The new Wetland Ordinance desigilates this wetland, including its e�tensions iilto Lots 8 and 10, as being a"Manage 2"protection classification,requu-ing a 25' buffer plus 20' structure setback from the buffer. In staff's discussions with Renae Clark of MCWD, she uldicated that MCWD would treat the wetland extensions(i.e.the ditcli area ui Lot 10 and the small pothole in Lot 8) as part of the rnain wetland body for buffer purposes. This will have a significant impact by reducing the buildable area within Lots 7,8,9 and 10,wluch has not been accounted for in the current plans, but is sketclied in for discussion purposes on E�hibit A-2. Park Commission Request for Trail Easement. The Park Coizunission reviewed this plat at theu September meeting and recoixulleiided that a 10' trail easement be established within the property along Willow Drive. This easement would allow flexibility in the development of of trail connections to Hackberry Park. Conservation Desian. Applicant is a�va.re tliat the Cit�= would like tlus project to incorporate elements of Conservation Design,as this area adj acent to Willow Drive was the subject of a specific ecological analysis by DSU as part of the Rural Oasis Study. I��lierent in that is the retention of natural vie��s iiito the site froiii the southwest, i.e. froin the Hackberry neighborhood and from northbound traffic on Willow. Perhaps tlie best way to acconlplish this would be for the applica.nt to provide an existing tree and vegetation survey as well as a proposed visual buffer plan,defining what eaisting visual elements (trees, sl�xubs, topography) will be retained, what will be destroyed via development, and what will be replaced in order to ineet the City's goals for this site. The preliminary plat and grading/drau�age/utiliiy plans provided to date do not specifically provide the level of infornlation to adequately address the visual iinpacts of tlus development. General Comments Many of the conunents noted iil the July PC meino are still applicaUle. Plaiming Cominission reached conclusions on certain topics at the July meei:ing, as noted. in the July 25 Notice of PC Action, including: - RPUD is the appropriate zone for this development;based on the cul�ent RR-1 B underlying zoning that allows the chuxch use via CUP, tlie church loi(Lot 2) should be excluded fronl the rezoning to RPUD. (OK)