Laserfiche WebLink
Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d <br />May 1 2 , 2 004 <br />Page 4 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />zone. The proposer requests amendments to the comprehensive plan and zoning map to <br />accommodate the extra 3-4 acres of development. It would also require the vacation of <br />parts of a ponding and flowage easement. Ther e is no clear justifica tion for these actions <br />other than to increase devel opable area. Section 1002-6 of th e subdivision ordinance lists <br />criteria for determining if a proposed de velopment is premature. These include <br />consistency with the land use plan, includi ng the staged growth area boundaries. A <br />project that is consistent with these criteria is premature. And staff did not yet know if <br />water service is adequate. If it is not, the project is premature. <br /> <br />Mr. Tralle asked who owned the tower. Mr . Grochala replied it was a holding company, <br />but he did not know the name. <br /> <br />Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. <br /> <br />Mike Black, Royal Oaks Realty, 1000 County Road E, Shoreview, showed the proposed <br />wetland delineation for the site. He noted on a 50-acre site, they were showing wetland <br />impacts on less than 1 acre. He noted they ha d done their job in looking at the impact on <br />the wetlands. He stated they were showing 64 lots on the 50-acre site. He noted they <br />were well below the typical single-family lot density. He indicated the lots were also <br />wider than normal. He showed the Boar d where the access was being proposed. He <br />showed the proposed phasing plan to the Board. He noted pha se 3 was the phase that was <br />affected by the Comprehensive Plan amendm ent. He had a neighborhood meeting in <br />March and one of the concerns was a trail access. He stated he had provided for a <br />trailway to the north by having an open space corridor proposed in their plan. <br /> <br />Chair Schaps stated there was a lot of thi ngs missing in this plan and asked what had <br />changed since the last meeting. Mr. Black re plied they had taken soil borings since the <br />last meeting. <br /> <br />Chair Schaps stated they were requesting a comprehensive plan amendment without <br />giving anything back. Mr. Black stated they had a meeting with staff after the last <br />meeting and they were working on the issues. He noted this was a process and they were <br />trying to address these things. He stated Rice Creek had not reviewed their wetland <br />delineation at this time. He noted they wa nted to wait until the gr owing season started, <br />but he understood they were goi ng to try and review it tomorrow. He stated they were <br />still working with Tec Panel. <br /> <br />Chair Schaps asked if going beyond the MUSA line was a financial issue. Mr. Black <br />replied it made more sense for the development to use those ten lots. <br /> <br />Mr. Pogalz asked if there had been any conve rsation with the propert y owner to the north <br />to see if they were willing to sell. Mr. Black replied he had not and he did not know <br />when a potential connection would be made, if at all. <br /> <br />A resident of Fox Road expressed his concer ns about increase in traffic and also the <br />construction trucks. He stated he wanted to see an access to the north. He expressed <br />concern regarding the drainage. <br />