05/08/1995 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 1995 the cost of all utility extensions, cost of operation and maintenance to the system and would pay all up front costs relative to the extension of the utility systems. Mr. Brixius said that staff is recommending that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the MUSA land trade be approved. Rezone Request from Rural (R) to Single -Family Residential (R- 1) - Mr. Brixius explained that approximately 2/3rds of the site is zoned Rural. The developer is requesting a rezone to R-1. This is consistent with the zoning on the balance of the site. This request is also consistent with the original concept plan that was approved in 1994. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identifies this area as a single-family residential district. The area would be served by public utilities, at the developers expense, and generally address the performance standards. Preliminary Plat - The preliminary plat consists of 105 lots on approximately 51 acres. The net density would be 2.8 units per acre. The lot and block arrangements conform with requirements. Staff did cite a number of concerns with a number of lots in regard to lot area. The concern involves buildable area above the wetlands. The lots in question are not included in the first phase of development. Lots 8, 17 and 18 in the first phase were cited as a concern in regard to slopes and fill. These lots contain dredged fill material from the County Ditch and the removal or changing of their topography will not create a problem. Staff will not have a problem with this. Lot 18 is an "abut" lot. Other lots in the second addition raise concern regarding buildable land above the wetlands. The developer is working with the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) to determine if these lots will be acceptable and whether mitigation to allow the lots to be filled will be acceptable. If these lots do not receive RCWD approval, some modification in the preliminary plat will be necessary when the second phase is brought to the City for approval. Lot 18 represents a "abut" lot enclosed by two (2) adjoining corner lots. Lot 18 would orient to the north and the adjoining lots would orient to the east and to the west. An "abut" lot arrangement is a less than desirable design feature and staff is recommending that the lot be eliminated. Mr. Brixius noted that Mr. Johnson, the developers engineer did not share his opinion of Lot 18 and would address this matter later in this meeting. The street arrangement in the preliminary plat complies with all PAGE 9