Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.' , <br />~~/~ <br />DESIGN PLANNING ASSOCIATE INC. <br />:arl R. Dale, Principal Planner Phc~e: (~?'17) 738-0174 <br />'166 WINDGATE RUAll WUODBURY MINNESOTA <br />Apx,~l 21, 1982 <br />P~,ANNING REPORT <br />~~~ <br />F~~~ P~.anning <br />Heights, <br />sslzs <br />/~~" U <br />Commission and City Council, <br />MN <br />City`of Falcon <br />By Carl R. Dale, Planning Consultant <br />S~}~~ect: Suggested Criteria/Guidelines for Development of <br />Hawkins-Hermes Property <br />A~'he request of the Plannini; Commission, I evaluated the PUD <br />Cx eria'euggested by the Tatum Woods Task Force; a ~.engthy and <br />dQfi~iled'oral report was submitted to .the Planning Co~misaion at <br />th~'June 12, 1982 public meeting. Detailed written ngtes of my <br />p~e~entation were presented to the City Staff after tY~e meeting. <br />It} ~uigmary, I noted that the neighborhood suggestions were headed <br />i~}'rhe right direction with ~ "typical" 1-family home `subdivision <br />np~~necessarlly being their pbjcctive ~r urge and devgl'opment of <br />tl~q;land'in question. I did, however, suggest that certain of <br />~K~ submitted criteria for a "PUll" should be modified ,:=and sug- <br />tpep~~d to be more effective, practical, and easier tp°,~understand <br />~~}f~ interpret for proper administration and enforcemgtlt. <br />• I'~yggested certain changes, additions, and possible different <br />~p~~oaches to evaluation of development plans that have been and <br />ma~-';be proposed in the future. As requested by the Punning <br />GgO-u~ission, I a~n herewith submitting my suggestions fir the cri- <br />t~r~a to be utilized in evaluating development plans ~or the property <br />~~ i~ 'que~t~ion. : <br />:. <br />Ssy~rai~ summary comments must serve as the foundation=`and a back- <br />gx~q~nd for t}~e material hereinafter contained: <br />1, All prior plans submitted have been evaluated using the various <br />,'`etandar~is (including locatiunal criteria) containdd in the <br />-new, proposed Zoning Code nuw under study by the F~lanning <br />~' Commission (copies of applicable material attached' herewith). <br />Also, development plans huv~~ been evaluated on the: basis of <br />~a; City Staff and Consultant's professional education, training, <br />at}d experience. <br />2.: Careful examination of the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan <br />'' was also employed since any development plan shoui.d be in con- <br />fo~m~ty to said Plan. The City Plan text (housing, population, <br />laid use, etc.) calls for possible housing diversity and an <br />objective to increase the projected population of the Community <br />and. the designation of a "PUD" Zoning District €or the land in <br />question to aid in attaining various stated policies and ob~ec- <br />tives. Some prior development plans submitted for increased <br />dwelling unit and population density have been found by the <br />• Planning Commission to be in conformity to the C3,ty's Land <br />Use Plan and policy (includes housing and population). <br />' -1- <br />± ./'•~ <br />~~___.~ ...~~~... ._... ~.-. rr.+..+u. T -- <br />