Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETINGJUNE 25, 2003 <br />10APPROVED MINUTES <br />• Create a buffer around the pond. <br />• Work with the City Forester to save the oak trees. <br />• Work on the design. <br />• Address staff recommendations. <br />The Board expressed concerns due to the site location in a rural zone, the required <br />Comprehensive Plan amendment, and the MUSA allocation. The Board <br />recommended that a precedent not be set. <br />O’Dea made a motion to pass on the recommendations. O’Connell seconded the <br />motion. Motion carried unanimously. <br />B.Bruggeman Properties/330 Birch Street/Rezone/Preliminary Plat/Site <br />Plan Review/CUP/New Application <br />Asleson reviewed the background and analysis. <br />Chair Kukonen inquired if the service station was still proposed. Halen <br />responded it was not. <br />Donlin questioned what was involved in the commercial expansion area for Phase <br />II. Councilmember Carlson responded that Outlot B was Phase II. <br />Asleson clarified that Phase II included the Park and Playground area. Donlin <br />added in the Northwest corner. <br />Councilmember Carlson indicated the next work session would be in July, and <br />would be addressing a longer commercial area on Hodgson Road and the removal <br />of the service station. The proposal included unattached, one-story townhouses. <br />The commercial on Hodgson Road had become a ponding and recreation area. <br />Donlin inquired if the zoning was dense. Councilmember Carlson answered that <br />it was medium density with 3-6 units per acre. Previously, 1-4 units per acre was <br />considered low. <br />Grundhofer questioned if the infiltration areas were walkable. If they were there <br />should be signage, especially in the common areas. <br />Halen inquired about a monument sign. O’Connell recommended that because it <br />was commercial, the sign should be lit only during business hours. <br />Chair Kukonen suggested that the density could free up open space. Another <br />issue was that the development could have no more than 65% impervious. <br />Donlin asked if the infiltration area was shallow. O’Connell responded that G1 <br />infiltration basin was not a depressioned area.