04-16-2007 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

F #06-3225 875 Wayzata Boulevard Apri112,2007 - Page 2 Application Status � CMP Amendment. This application cannot be formally acted upon until Met Council takes , . action on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Zoning File#06-3201) allowing development of � �. � � the site at urban densities. Proposed amendment lanbuage was approved by the City Council on � ' August 28, and forwarded to Met Council on October 10, 2006. Although as of last November ' � � ' we had an expectation that Met Council would approve the amendment with little delay, in � � ..� . December Met Council requested additional information to confirm that Orono's new sewered � � � . development density since 2000 has been at least 3.0 units per acre. Initial reviews by City staff . � � � indicated this was not the case. After a number of discussions with Met Council representatives, . � � it was determined that certain categories of property could be removed from the calculation, � ` hence the attached table (Exhibit C) indicates that Orono's sewered development density for . . � 2000-present was 3.41 units per acre. Met Council's Community Development Committee is , � scheduled to review the Orono amendment on April 16, hence staff anticipates approval of the. � � . '. amendment in the near future. . � � � . . RPUD Concept Plan Review. Pending approval of the CMP amendinent, staff brought the . . applicant's initial RPUD application forwaxd to Platuung Commission in August as a concept � . � plan to allow an opportunity to identify potential concerns, issues, and development parameters . that applicant should address. The City Engineer also submitted comments in August (Exhibit A � of 11-16-06 memo). Applicants then submitted revised plans responding to those comments (Exhibits C of 11-16-06 memo). These were reviewed'by the Planning Commission on November 20, 2006 (see PC minutes). Since then, applicants have provided additional information in response to Plaruziilg Commission's request that applicant address Conservation � � Design with this project. Planning Commission additionally requested that some elevation views , of the proposed buildings be submitted for consideration-we have not yet seen these. . . The�purpose of bringing this application forward at this time absent Met Council approVal of the ' ', � CMP amendment, is primarily to bring the new Planning Commissioners up to speecl, and . � � identify any additional information needed from the applicant. The applicant would like to move � the project forward as soon as possible. The City Engineer and Fire Marshal will be reviewin� � the current plans prior to Council review of the concept plan. � ,' �le:lelop:nea�#�Para�eters per�Prapose� �IYI�Atne�adar�e�a� �. . . . • . . The CMP amendment is intended to apply to just the applicant's property and no others. The :, � � � . amendment notes that in addition to the permitted, conditional and accessory uses allowed within . . ' the RR-1B zoning district, this amendment allows for residential development of the propei-ty�at � a density of 1 unit per 0.70 dry buildable acres (1.43 units per acre). It then goes on to establish . . parameters for any residential development of the property at a density greater than 0.5�units per . �� acre of dry buildable land. Please review the memo of August 17, 2006 for a list of those parameters. In brief; the site is limited to 9 detached low-profile (one story plus basement) single . � ,- , family homes designed to blend with the natural surroundin;s, served by municipal sewer and � water, adhering to the principals of Conservation Design and all wetland protection re;ulations, preservin` the rural character as viewed from old Highway 12, minimizin� visual impacts from � the Luce Line, with a sin�_>le vehicular access to Hi�Thway 1?. . � .