My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/10/2000 Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1982-2020
>
2000
>
01/10/2000 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/13/2014 10:42:43 AM
Creation date
2/10/2014 10:26:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
01/10/2000
Council Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
129
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
• Environmental Board would like to work closely with city staff to make this park a <br />demonstration of the environmentally aware nature of the city. <br />■ <br />.V; <br />• <br />Blue Bill Ponds <br />Environmental Coordinator, Marty Asleson, introduced and gave some background to <br />this development project. Blue Bill Ponds is a 35 -acre subdivision proposal under <br />consideration for preliminary plating. This site is in MUSA and zoned R -1. The location <br />of this project is immediately west of and adjacent to the Highland Meadows proposal. <br />Blue Bill ponds is scheduled to go to Planning and Zoning Board on October 13, 1999. <br />Tom Von Bische from Heritage Development explained the first version of this plat was <br />more sensitive to the wetlands, but because of roadway issues, they had to go back to the <br />drawing board. The land Northeast of the development is owned by a church and this <br />church is considering a land swap. If the church agrees to this land swap, Heritage <br />Development will go back to their first drawing of the preliminary plat. Mr. Von Bische <br />showed the Environmental Board the differences and the board agreed the first plat is <br />more environmentally sensitive than the second is. After discussion, Mr. Lanyon made a <br />motion to approve the following recommendations: <br />1. The design of the development should be modified to create a 50 -foot buffer along <br />the eastern edge of the property to protect the significant st. , <, .f hardwoods on the <br />adjacent property to the east. <br />2. Ponds should be designed to infiltrate water on <br />3. The city permit flexibility in R -1 zoning st <br />setback, frontage, etc... to permit <br />changing density. <br />4. Attempts should be ma <br />runoff leaving the site. <br />5. When restoring vegetation e site, the Environmental Board recommends the use <br />of native materials, or other plants that require little irrigation or nutrient addition. <br />6. Property owners be informed that 8 — 10 inches deep tilling of topsoil prior to sod or <br />seeding will improve turf performance. <br />7. The creation of a buffer of native vegetation around natural and created wetlands. <br />Mr. Trehus seconded the motion, motion passed unanimously. <br />street width, lot size, street <br />r tracts of open space without <br />and storm water treatment train for surface <br />Highland Meadows Re -plat <br />e.City roved a re`nnA to PDO-and preliminary plat for Highland Meadows in <br />October 1997. No utilities were available at that time and no noteworthy progress was <br />made on the project until this year. The original developer recently acquired approval for <br />a wetland mitigation plan from the Rice Creek Watershed District. A second <br />development firm acquired the project from the original developer. The second <br />developer applied for a final plat. The grading/wetland plan approved by the Rice Creek <br />Watershed District is significantly different from the preliminary grading plan approved <br />with the preliminary plat in 1997. There are other changes than the grading plan. Staff is <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.