My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/31/2001 Environmental Board Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Environmental Board
>
Minutes
>
2001
>
01/31/2001 Environmental Board Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/22/2016 1:25:26 PM
Creation date
6/5/2014 4:20:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Environmental Board
Env Bd Document Type
Env Bd Minutes
Meeting Date
01/31/2001
Env Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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 MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 <br />were used as in the concept plan. Asleson clarified general comments were wanted for a <br />future concept plan. <br />Grundhofer asked if there was a garage located in the white space. <br />Mr. Goertz explained that the proposal was to subdivide the area leaving the piece for the <br />farm. The house on the corner was working with the county. <br />Grundhofer inquired about the split of 3.98 acres from the rest of the property set aside <br />for future development. Mr. Goertz responded that there was a renter living in the house. <br />The owner wanted to continue renting to them. <br />Chair Lanyon stated the concern was for the greenways, and the needed buffers near the <br />wetlands. An increase in open spaces and connections with the greenspaces were key. <br />He urged them to work with the Greenway Project, that it would be beneficial. <br />Mr. Goertz explained that the owner's association would own the land and a landscape <br />committee would decide future changes. <br />Kukonen indicated that a standard buffer would be required around a wetland. <br />Asleson agreed that a buffer was needed with the greenway The bridge on Highway 49 <br />would make a walkway. The soils in the area were found to beIsanti wet, which was <br />sandy with water down about 18 inches, and supports canary grass <br />Mr. Goertz stated that they had talked to the Watershed District, and those areas were <br />avoided. The ditch was dug 35 years ago The has been in probate for five years. <br />The townhouses were in the $200,000 and -over price range. <br />Mach stated that he was impressed with' amount of land that was to remain untouched. <br />Mr. Goertz explained that about 30% of the land was to remain untouched, with 70 units <br />on 40.5 acres. There were plans for the association to control the use, and staff had <br />recommended a conservation easement. <br />Asleson agreed that a conservation easement was needed to preserve the buffer, so that it <br />would not be seen:as unnecessary and mowed down. <br />Chair Lanyon stated that there had been no discussion of landscaping, and the Board <br />' <br />recommends native -plantings. Asleson concurred and suggested that a management plan <br />be drawn up for the undeveloped areas. <br />Chair Lanyon pointed out that it takes creative design, but buildings could be closer <br />together to give larger views. Mr. Goertz responded that the configurations were <br />designed to break up the impression of a line of garages. He explained that in Roseville <br />the pads were 32 feet by 80 feet, but here they would be 40 feet by 80 feet. <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.