Agenda - Council - 02/08/2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Assistant Public Works Director: Olson indicated it will be difficult to shift Potassium Street due to the wetland along the west side. Staff'Will do what they can with this request. Associate Planner Wald indicated staff wil! w0rkwith the applicant on Council's direction on the plan. No Council action required. Case #2: Reques[ for SketCh Plan APproval of Rum River Meadows; Case of National Growth, LLC Associate Planner Wald explained this site is located adjacent to the development that was just discussed. National Growth, LLC Submitted a sketch plan to develop a residential detached townhome subdivision ion the Property gei~erallY located east of Potassium Street and south of 157th Lane. The subject property is 10 acres in Size and zoned R-1 Single Family. City Code restricts density to three units per acre or up to four units per acre through a PUD that can include townhomes. The sketch plan is propOsing !t° plat the property into 26 detached townhome units. The subject property will need to be rezoged tol PUD and the required rezoning application will need to be submitted in conjuncti°n with the .preliminary plat. Associate Planner Wald explained the sub~livision is showing a public street servicing the units. City Code restricts cul-de-sac streets to~ 600 feet; the proposed public street exceeds this requirement and this wOuld need~to be addressed as part of the PUD agreement. The sketch plan is providing for a connection to. the adjacent property to the south as required by City Code. There is a substantial wetland On the proposed plat that will need to be delineated and encumbered with drainage and utility easements ,On the preliminary and final plats. A detailed grading and drainage plan will be reviewed as Part of the preliminary plat submittal. The subdivision will be subject to permittingl by the Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization. Associate Planner Wald indicated the Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan at their January 6, 2004 meeting. Several residents Stated their opposition regarding the proposed development. She explained the planning commission unanimously denied the sketch plan based on concerns with the proposed density, wetland/topography challenges, and lack of compliance with the PUD guide!ines} Subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting, staff received a revised sketch plan showing areducti°n to 24 units at a density of 3.4 units per acre. She advised staff feels this is an appr°Priate densitY and appropriate development in this area. Councilmember Strommen indicated she has the :same comments on this plan as the previous one in terms of density, the appropriateness of the PUD and benefits to the City, especially with these two wetlands. She inquired about inclUsior/of the wetland in the open space calculations. Associate Planner Wald replied City Code States only 50 percent of the wetland can be included in the open space requirements. City Council/January 25, 2005 page 11 of 24