My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-09-2016 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2016
>
05-09-2016 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/30/2016 8:33:01 AM
Creation date
9/30/2016 8:22:25 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
590
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
#16-3822 <br />May 4, 2016 <br />Page 4 of 8 <br /> <br />e. Planning Commission suggests that flexibility in number of stories is warranted, since <br />while most homes proposed will have two stories above a basement or walkout, the <br />topography along the southern lots overlooking the wetland is such that some walkout <br />levels may be defined as stories based on the current definition relating to percentage <br />of wall exposure. <br />f. It is acknowledged that site grading will likely remove all existing trees and <br />vegetation from Wayzata Boulevard to the wetlands in order to accommodate this <br />development, and that lowering the grade adjacent to Wayzata Boulevard is likely to <br />drastically change the visual appearance of this site as viewed from the County road. <br />g. With regard to the potential second-phase multi-family building which would make <br />use of a portion of the landfill, Planning Commission suggests that the entire site be <br />rezoned to RPUD, with separate standards for that building being established with a <br />separate “Phase 2” development review process if/when that building is proposed. It <br />would also be appropriate to note in the initial approvals that such use would require <br />replatting Outlot A into a building site. <br /> <br />Additional comments from the Planning Commission’s perspective can be found in the April 18 <br />minutes. <br /> <br />Park Commission Review and Comments, 5/2/16 The Park Commission reviewed the project <br />plans at their May meeting and were asked to address two specific items – whether a trail <br />easement should be granted along Wayzata Boulevard, and whether there is any desire to acquire <br />land for park use as opposed to collecting a Park Dedication Fee for this development. On a vote <br />of 5-0 the Commission indicated that a trail easement should be required, but they acknowledged <br />the difficulty and potential costs of actually constructing and maintain a continuous trail along <br />Wayzata Boulevard make it unlikely the easement will be used. With regard to the land versus <br />fee question, the Commission voted 5-0 to table pending further review of the site by the <br />members and consideration of whether there is a need for park land at this location. <br />Based on the Fair Market Value of the property, the park dedication fee to be collected at the <br />time of final plat approval is anticipated to be within the range of $87,750 to $149,850. <br /> <br />Revised/Updated Conservation Design Report A revised Conservation Design Report has been <br />submitted and the revised pages are attached as Exhibit D. <br /> <br />Hennepin County Comments A copy of the preliminary plat was forwarded to Hennepin County <br />for comment on April 26. While no formal comments have been received as of this writing, staff <br />has received an indication via voicemail that the County likely will limit the site to one access <br />point, which will potentially result in a revised plat layout. It also appears that the County <br />will require right and left turn lanes, and would like to further discuss the issue of trails along <br />Wayzata Boulevard. <br /> <br />City Engineer Comments As noted in the Planning Commission memo, City Consulting <br />Engineer Robert Bean has reviewed the submitted plans and his comments generally pertain to <br />engineering matters that can be resolved in due course. Those comments are included as Exhibit <br />E of the Planning Commission packet. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.