My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/08/2003 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2003
>
01/08/2003 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2014 12:11:20 PM
Creation date
6/10/2014 8:49:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
01/08/2003
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
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
Planning & Zoning Board <br />December 11, 2002 <br />Page 10 <br />Mr. Lyden asked if this was before or after the first public hearing. Mr. Kirmis replied he <br />did not have that information. <br />Chair Schaps clarified staff's recommendation that they were requesting this be tabled <br />until staff's concerns were addressed. Mr. Kirmis replied that was correct. <br />Ms. Lane asked if they had as many MUSA acres as they were referring to. Mr. Lyden <br />stated they had approved a new bank. <br />Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. <br />Gary Uhde, developer and John Johnson, Metro Land Surveying and Engineering. <br />Mr. Uhde thanked the P &Z Board and members of the staff for their assistance with this <br />development. He noted they had worked extensively with the neighborhood and the <br />Airpark Association. He stated they had worked diligently with all of those parties that <br />answered or tried to be sensitive to all of their concerns. He noted there were some very <br />sensitive environmental issues and he acknowledged there were issues with density and <br />stated they had taken the minimum density as possible. He stated they had a difference <br />of opinion with staff regarding traffic. He stated they hoped to have consistent colors, <br />overheads and eves on the hangers that would fit better into the neighborhood. He <br />indicated he would work with the Airpark Association regarding the hangers. He noted <br />the plan was not perfect; it did not give everyone everything they wanted, but it was the <br />best they could do at this time. <br />John Johnson stated in August they were made aware of the change in the <br />Comprehensive Plan that changed the 78 acres that was the bulk of this 95 acre project, <br />which changed from low /medium density to medium density. He stated when they <br />applied the medium density to the developer acres, that threw 90 plus units into the mix <br />that they had not planned on. He stated they were told they needed to comply with the <br />Comprehensive Plan or get an amendment. He stated this plan addressed all of those <br />density issues. He stated he was not going to debate the good or the bad of the density; <br />they were just attempting to comply with the Comprehensive Plan. He explained how <br />they addressed the traffic issues and concerns that staff had. He stated they had expanded <br />the park and trails. He indicated they increased the ponding and wetland from 9.77 acres <br />to 17.5 acres in this plan. He stated in the landscape plans they showed 1100 trees as <br />being placed on this project. He noted they identified installation of the native grasses. <br />He stated to the Park Board and the Environmental Committee had approved this plan. <br />He stated the Airpark lots had been increased. He stated the Airpark Association <br />requested to buffer as much of their runway outlot with airpark user lots. He stated the <br />elimination of lots 4 and 9 in Block 4 would remove over 350 feet of buffer and add 3 <br />non Airpark lots with direct access and abutting the runway outlot. He noted the phasing <br />plan was outlined in their proposal. He stated it was important to have all four products <br />in their first phase for marketing. He noted if they started construction in April, 2003, <br />they hoped to have the models open in October, 2003. He stated they anticipated they <br />could market 40 units the first year, so they would be at the end of 2004 before they <br />started moving forward with plans for the second addition and when the second addition <br />was approved in 2005, they would be out of lots, if they did an 80 lot subdivision. He <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />t <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.