Agenda - Council - 03/27/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

wetlands and/or the City storm sewer system. The development may need to be alt~ accommodate that need. Mike Black, Royal Oaks Realty, stated that Royal Oaks Realty has owned the and had a few discussions some time ago with the City Council regarding the the land. During those discussions with the Council, the Council reques}ed~i~i any development wait until the moratorium expired on the property. The mo~6~ium has now lifted and they are looking to develop the site. Currently the propel.is ZSh~iBusiness Nowthen Boulevard and R-1 Single Family. The Comprehensi~)~i~n~sub~i~d to the Met Council designates the property as Mixed Residential includinglM~tiu~.'~:'fnsity, High Density, and S~ngle Farmly. The current development plan..;fd0es conform to the submitted Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Black explained that the sit%~l~des 86 ~.~s and will include 308 total units. There will be 71 single-family units, 152 .t0wniaome unitsi";~ct~85 senior units. The townhomes will be eight unit buildings and be 1,2~);g~e,feet wire :bedrooms and 1.5 baths. The price range on the townhomes will be~fi'om "$;f20~0~siiiid¢'~l&:i000. The senior complex would be built by Real Life and they will have a repr~Xtati3e present during the next phase of the project to explain what they do. The single-famif~-,~ts will btCnd in with the existing neighborhood and range in pri9_e from $180,000 to $300,000¢ i>Mr. B!~}ilhoted that one lot does not meet the setback requ~<~ts,and reviewed its location ;'ri a:;; Eihsula. He also explained that they intend to ext~lS~i-:the~xi ike path system thro~u~ }~'~ development. If the City desires them to cons~i~sid~Walks, the~m~ly ~guld elim~ the trail connections because it would be redundant~'~-~' \5i,~3~:, : Principal Planner Trudgeon noted that thei'i~ket does~i~how a connection to Fluorine Street. He explained that City staff and the'~dek;i0~er have ha~)iscussions if it would be wise to make that connection:i ~:~k:this point they r~all:~ don't have an answer other than the lots to the south of the.d~v~l'6Pment al-e hrger lots and tl'i~is.,s~6me sensitivity to keep them separate. ActingCh3~erson Johnsod:~quired as to h~" ~4~leveloper felt about removing the connection b etwe~n' t~,~°~omes~ .an, d:- ~;~0r,h~usin lex. Mr. Black repii~:d::~iCt'hey woui~ ac~<;~'~:~' either way. He noted that the connection waSa .,~.:,~:: :"~g~tipn made b~'~.s-taff !n early discussions so there would be two access points to the senior ~6m~IeX,}SHe stated th~f~;he-~wouli:t:be willing to hear an opinion from a traffic consultant. Acting Chai~son John~6fi':'explained that residents along Dysprosium Street have had many concerns regai/~ing traffic~:zilong that roadway and the concern would be if the connection existed between the townhomes and senior complex, people would cut through there and go south on Dysprosium Street to C.R. #116. '-¢}~. Black..re~ewed the layout of the private streets within the development. Acting. Chairperson Johnson inquired as to how the Commission felt about private roadways. Planning Commission/March 6, 2001 Page 4 of 6 I I I i I I I I I I t i' I ! i I I