Laserfiche WebLink
#16-3822 <br />May 4, 2016 <br />Page 7 of 8 <br /> <br /> <br />8. The revised Conservation Design Master Plan (CDMP) has been revised to include <br />more complete recommendations and direction to address the topics of Invasive <br />Species, Protection of Significant Tree Stands, and Protection of Wetlands. Are <br />there any other concerns regarding environmental protection of this property as it <br />develops? <br />9. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> <br />Staff Recommendation <br />The site plan for this application would appear to be in flux given the County indications that a <br />second access point is not going to be allowed. How that impacts the internal road layout is of <br />concern, and even more so regarding a potential future multi-family dwelling option. <br />There are a variety of topics noted above for which Council discussion would assist the <br />developer in moving forward. Briefly, these include: <br /> - Acceptability of proposed density, desirability of Phase 2 multi-family building <br /> - Whether flexibility will be granted for lot area, lot width, setbacks, FAR, hardcover, etc. <br /> - Public vs private road status, paved widths <br /> - Sufficiency of proposed 10% private recreational spaces to meet RPUD standards <br /> - Acceptance of portions of Block 3 within 250’ of Lake Classen OHWL <br /> - Determination of need for trail easement along Wayzata Boulevard <br /> - Pending Park Commission review, any desire to take land for park vs park fee <br /> - Acceptance of the conceptual house plans and elevations as proposed <br /> - Acceptance of expected grade changes and vegetation removal along Wayzata Blvd <br /> - Additional topics as noted in this memo <br /> <br />Staff would recommend the following course of action: <br />a. Council direct staff to draft a resolution for conditional approval of the Comprehensive <br />Plan Amendment for adoption in two weeks. The amendment would then be immediately <br />forwarded to Metropolitan Council for review and approval. In the interim pending that <br />approval, Council should attempt to identify alternate sites in the City for higher density <br />development. <br />b. Given the anticipated site plan revisions, Council may conclude that the preliminary plat for <br />this development as presented is not ready for preliminary plat approval. The application <br />could be tabled for revisions. At such time that Council determines the plan is generally <br />acceptable, then direct staff to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval, <br />incorporating appropriate conditions. The resolution would include language noting that <br />approval of the rezoning to RPUD is preliminarily approved and will be formally <br />approved at the time of final plat approval. <br />