Agenda - Planning Commission - 05/02/2002

Home

space, Staff is suo-estino== = fotlowina~ that which is currently proposed Lq the amendments.;.t$7:~e Zoning Chapter: 40 % of' the ~oss area of the project site should be open space, roads, buildin.os, 'pg~ne lots and other hardsu~ace areas, and wetlands; ~d 1~% O?{]~he~ 40%~:~ should be set aside as an identi~abte co--on ar~a for use by ~ residents of ~a~elopm~nt. City Staff reco~ends sketch pl~ approval subject to the Memopolitan Co~?~:~g~st:: ~e comprehensive pI~ mendment ~d compli~ce wi~ ~e CiW Staff Revi er dat~f~=ch ,.28, 2002. ' ' . ~ Jo~ Peterson, O~wood Land Development, stated one concern l~);~~ed s~eet, wMch ~s mademark of ~e desirer, rock Hamson. He said ~s is caa~;%0$~t He said me en~heers rhsed a problem; ~e smeets do not meet the 30 mp-~t?~ata;i~ sta=dkd w~ch Mi~esota ~aditionally uses. %ese smeets ~e desired for 26 mph.: ~'$¢~xplaine4~e difference of time getting from one end of the development to the other ~i:'~e curved' ;~,,is 16 to 20 seconds. If that 16 Seconds is crucial, it changes their plan si~~¢~,:he state~~ treetsneed to be redesig-ned to accommodate 30 mph, this will mean they wilF~.~2..t~::i~' Up '§3me green space: City Engineer Steve Jankowski noted the rule cannot be changed ~?d~se it is a state statute. He offered to research this issue. _~..,,, ,, ~:, _.-.~.~e. Chairperson Nixt questioned the st~gi:~f the~sabEass, to the wesL Mr. Peterson explained that iri'"~ildlif~:7~anctuary to :~).~hi:ther~}i,s astub s=eet to the west ~d his company owns it. He addressed~ ~een ~:~'~issUd~:ti~ ~s en~neers said they ~e ~. Peterson s~:for=.~:...~,, the-.mts:~,.. ~ on the pubhc ~s~eet,,:,~,:. there ~s 30 feet between ~e ~ont of ~e umt ~d dght-of-~::'~e ord'~ce calls for 35 ~t ~.~e right-of-way, ~d ~erefore a vafi~ce Moti0n;by C~ission~Yp~p~ ~,c°n~bfY.Chai~erson Nixt, to approve the sketch plan for Sunflower mff~¢~S.qn~g¢~f'~h;::~ ~d comprehensive plan ~endment ~d compli~ce with CiW Staff ~'~w'::Le~ ...... dated M~ 28, 2002, and providing ~ access to ~e west wit~ B~d~es of S~b~er ~dge. · Morton C~¢. Voting '~eSg?Cha~erson NiXt, Co~issioners JoMson, Brauer, Kociscak, Reeve, Swe~d Watso~¢;~ng No: None. Absent: None.' Case ~7: ~quest for Sketch Plan Review of W~d~fe SanCtuary 2"~ Addition; Case of .... :~kwood Land Development Coi~m~iU Develop~nent Assistant Wald stated Oakwood Land Development .h~ applied for sk~[:~fi: plan review to replat Lots 1 and 2 of Wildlife Sancmau Addition located west of State I ' I I I I I I I I Planning Commission/April 4, 2002 Page 10 of 14 96