Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Cich inquired if there is something unique to the 4 PUDs proposed this <br />evening that causes City Staff to propose the PUD aff'nvnation resolution. <br />Mr. Hartley reported that the City and the PUDs are trying to meet the year-end time frame <br />for policy changes and there is not the luxury to review the preliminary concept plans over <br />several meetings. City Staff is attempting to make sure that City Council understands that <br />approving the PUD concept plans requires following through with the PUDs but not <br />exactly with the way in which the sketches propose. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember DeLuca and seconded by Councilmember Pearson to adopt <br />Resolution #89-12-341 affirming the City's policy and significance as to rural area Planned <br />Unit Development approvals. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilmembers DeLuca, Pearson, Cich <br />and Peterson. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Mark Banwart proceeded to explain the intent of PuDs as one of providing for flexibility in <br />plat design in lieu of at least 20% of the land being preserved for open space and storm <br />water retention. <br /> <br />Kevin Brand - 8910 176th Avenue - Inquired if PUDs allow for more lots to be platted in a <br />certain area than if the 2.5 acre minimum lot size was followed. <br /> <br />Mark Banwart replied that overall, the number of lots platted in a PUD would be the same <br />number as would be allowed if the 2.5 acre minimum was used. <br /> <br />Dorothy Stadfelt - 15111 Juniper Ridge Drive - Inquired if ponds and streams qualify for <br />meeting the 20% open space requirement. <br /> <br />Mark Banwart replied that ponds and streams qualify towards meeting the 20% open space <br />requirement. <br /> <br />Debra Hill - 5821 160th Lane - Suggested that because the lots are smaller in a PUD, they <br />will drain into the preserved open spaces even though they are required to have a certain <br />amount of Class 1 soils for on-site septic systems. <br /> <br />Mark Banwart replied that the smaller lots are required to have the same amount of Class I <br />soils as a 2.5 acre lot -- 27,000 square feet. <br /> <br />Debra Hill - Expressed concern with a mound septic system that was developed on the <br />property next to hers and that there will be standing water and well problems for her if the <br />water table comes back up to where it usually is in non-dry years. <br /> <br />Bev Semanko - 6311 169th Lane - Expressed concern that some of the one acre lots <br />proposed in the PUDs will be able to meet the 27,000 square feet of Class 1 soils <br />requirement. Bev also disagreed with utilizing already DNR protected wetlands to meet the <br />20% preservation requirement. She is also concerned that allowing housing development <br />around wetlands will result in the development of more mound septic systems and <br />inadequate drainfields. <br /> <br />Mark Banwart replied that the PUDs have to develop drainage plans acceptable to the City. <br /> <br />City Council/December 19, 1989 <br /> Page 9 of 22 <br /> <br /> <br />