Laserfiche WebLink
1. Compliance with the City Staff review letter dated January 31, 2002, Revised <br /> 2002, with modifications to point 4 to include lan=mmge regarding a <br /> private street <br /> 2. The applicant receiving a variance to the front yard.setback <br /> 3. A revised' street design will be provided <br /> 4. Variance is approved for the length of the road. <br /> <br /> Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt; Commissk <br /> Motion <br /> Reevel Sweet, and'Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: None: <br /> <br /> Case #6: Request for Sketch Plan Review <br /> Development <br /> <br /> Presentation <br /> <br /> Community Development .Director Frotik explained Oakwood' has applied <br /> for sketch plan review of a townhome development proposed to be Ri.dge. The <br /> property is generally located property is <br /> currently zoned B-1 and B-2 the subject <br /> property for development City 1 recently approved a <br /> 2002 Amendment to the land Use from low <br /> density residential to medium dens'ity the <br /> approves <br /> amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, from B-I Bus/ness to R-3 <br /> Urban Residential .~i.1)l!'bej-equired to . property wiih residential uses at a net density <br /> not to exceed 7,,d~i~'¢:~;:~:&e. The p) 18.8 aCres in size. She explained <br /> pl~i~a~roposiJ~::i~31- '~":":~ units,' a gross density of 7 units per acre. <br /> the <br /> sketch <br /> The <br /> maximum~'{~'i~er of units ~wed Will be on a net density of land area exclusive of <br /> wetlan~aact major roads.,:~,:~ere appear to hte~etlands present on the property; the number of <br /> umts"~w, iI1 ha~z~.to be redi~e~,m,:::0r~er .to.~ply w~th the net density maximum. The total <br /> ..density attamalSI~e;,.,maS~':~ii~so'"~e~"~mpa~5~y the ate plan review. Interpretatmn of lot aze <br /> requirements in ff/'ai~,ea~ent R-3 Urban R~sidential standards require' a total lot area of 690,000 <br /> <br />system throug~;;~he plat. 'S'taff ~s suggesting that the plan be revised to provide for a future road <br />connection to ~'~: west, reorient bmldmgs to reduce the number of driveways on pubhc streets, <br />look for ways.,:'tO~ ehm~nate cut-through traffic wherever possible. S~dewalks w~ll be reqmred <br />'::~}i:i?i~>,along. .-~.- ..... one s~:i:)~f the public streets. A detailed drainage and grading plan will be addressed <br />~*.i:~'.uring the:i~bI'iminary plat and site plan' process. The project is also subject to the review and <br />p~e~itt/n~Pi-ocess of the Lower Rum P, Sver Watershed Management Organization (WMO). and <br />.MPCA:.i;'She said Staff is requesting that there be an area of common open space that can be used <br />fori active or passive recreation within the neighborhood. As a guideline for minimum green <br /> <br /> Planning Commission/April 4, 2002. <br /> Page 9 of 14 <br /> <br />95 <br /> <br /> <br />