My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Environmental Policy Board - 02/22/2021
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Environmental Policy Board
>
2021
>
Agenda - Environmental Policy Board - 02/22/2021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 10:06:29 AM
Creation date
2/24/2021 11:39:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Environmental Policy Board
Document Date
02/22/2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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).
View images
View plain text
Chairperson Valentine aye <br /> <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />The amendment was passed, and a roll call vote was performed on the new motion: <br /> <br />Board Member Fetterley aye <br />Board Member Bernard aye <br />Board Member Covart aye <br />Board Member Little aye <br />Acting Chairperson Hiatt aye <br />Board Member Moore aye <br />Chairperson Valentine aye <br /> <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />5.02: Review Preliminary Plat and Density Transitioning for Northfork Meadows, Case <br /> of Lennar (Project #20-135) <br /> <br />City Planner Anderson presented the staff report. He stated that the purpose of the case is to review <br />a request from Lennar for a Preliminary Plat application for Northfork Meadows. The subject <br />property is located east of Puma/Okapi Street and south of Alpine Drive and is approximately 33 <br />acres. The subject property has a split zoning with R-1 Residential (MUSA Detached Single <br />Family Homes) (80-foot-wide lots) along the eastern and southern boundary and the remainder of <br />the property is zoned R-1 Residential (MUSA Detached Villas) (65-foot-wide lots). He noted <br />that the Planning Commission recommended that the plans be amended to meet the minimum <br />planting requirements for density transitioning. <br /> <br />Board Member Covart asked if the same number of trees would go in the 45-foot area compared <br />to the 35-foot area. <br /> <br />Board Member Moore stated that she lives across from this parcel and commented that there is a <br />grove of oak trees that provides habitat for animals and therefore would recommend that the largest <br />amount of vegetation be added back into the development, even perhaps above what is required <br />by Code. <br /> <br />City Planner Anderson commented that the landscape plan as proposed adds in more than is <br />required by Code. He stated that overall, there is more planting than what the Code would require <br />with the exception of this density transition corridor. <br /> <br />Board Member Little noted that he is a former landscaper and asked if there is a requirement for <br />the type of soil used for the berm. <br /> <br />City Planner Anderson replied that the language states that it must be good, clean fill but does not <br />get more specific than that. <br /> <br /> <br />Environmental Policy Board / January 25, 2021 <br />Page 4 of 9 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.