Laserfiche WebLink
16-3855 <br /> August 10,2016 <br /> Page 8 of 9 <br /> for commercial development of this property, or is this the appropriate time and location <br /> to make the change? <br /> 2. Is the Planning Commission comfortable with the density of the development at 20 units <br /> per acre gross (14 units per acre net)? Note that the Stonebay Lofts with 52 units on 2.8 <br /> acres has a density of just over 18 units per acre. <br /> 3. If the developer had to construct a 3ra story over part of the building in order to meet <br /> required setbacks and hardcover limits while maintaining the same 70 units, how would <br /> Planning Commission react? One of the reasons a past Council was OK with the third <br /> story at the Lofts was its distance from Wayzata Boulevard, so the extra height would be <br /> so�newhat mitigated by the long views. The same justification might not apply for the <br /> proposed building. The B-6 standards for commercial office use of this site would limit the <br /> height to 30 feet, while the RPUD standards for "properties currently zoned ar guided in <br /> the comprehensive plan for commercial use" would allow height to exceed 30 feet but not <br /> to exceed three stories (not including underground parking level). How important is <br /> limiting the height or number of stories for this site? <br /> 4. Is there sufficient justification for flexibility in terms of: <br /> - Hardcover limit (50% allowed, 53% as designed)—any reason to allow flexibility? <br /> - Proximity of building to Wayzata Boulevard (30' proposed vs 50' RPUD requirement) <br /> 5. Planning Commission should discuss whether this development should be required to <br /> create the RPUD standard 10% private recreation space. If so, do the Pond Pavilion and <br /> surrounding yard areas satisfy that requirement? <br /> 6. Staff recommends that a l 0' trail easement be retained along the south boundary of the <br /> property. Should this developer be committed to establishing a trail along Wayzata <br /> Boulevard with a connection northward along the west end of the pond? Pending Hennepin <br /> County final decisions as to whether or wher should a trail be established (and who should <br /> pay for it) should the developer be expected to construct or assist in the cost of trail <br /> construction? Note that for other segments of trails within Stonebay, public trail <br /> construction by the developer was reimbursed from his paid Park Dedication Fees... <br /> 7. The conceptual landscaping layout does not provide any buffering from Wayzata <br /> Boulevard — is such buffering needed from a visual perspective from off-site, or from a <br /> perspective of the occupants of the building? <br /> 8. Are there any other issues or concerns with this sketch plan? <br /> Sketch Plan Review Parameters <br /> The goal of this review is to provide the developer with an overview of the pertinent City <br /> ordinances and how they affect the proposed plat, and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of <br /> the proposal. The above '`Summary of Issues for Consideration"' reveals a number of issues with <br /> the proposed development and should help Planning Commission provide direction to the <br /> applicant regarding the proposal. Planning Commission should review each topic and identify any <br /> issues to which the developer should pay special attention. <br /> As a sketch plan review, any comments or suggestions to the applicants are non-binding but will <br /> be extremely helpful as the applicants move forward. Because the concept technically is a <br />