06/09/2004 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 4 The plan shows separate driveways onto Aqua Lane for Units 1, 2, 3, and 4. It is not clear why this is necessary. Though the proposed design does not violate any City requirements, it is less desirable than other options. The two twin -home structures could face one another across a shared drive. A driveway exists that serves the existing townhomes on the north side of the site. It was constructed centered on the property line. This driveway could be used by the current proposal with a shared driveway agreement. This was the original intent of this driveway. However, the property to the north now is under separate ownership. The plan shows additional right of way to be dedicated for Lake Drive (CSAH 23). This would meet Anoka County's requirement for 60' from centerline. Utilities, Stormwater Management: There is no ponding or treatment included in the proposal. The existing stormwater management design for the area accommodates development on this site. However, stormwater treatment must be provided in accordance with the most recent regulatory requirements. This will be reviewed in greater detail as the project progresses. The Rice Creek Watershed District requires District review for multi -unit development over 2.5 acres. The Watershed District received the application May 20, 2004, and it is scheduled for its meeting on June 23. Landscaping: The existing townhomes screen this site from the lake, so screening is not an issue as it might be for lakeshore property. The proposed landscaping is adequate. However, several species should be changed according to the Environmental Board's recommendations, as listed in the conditions of approval. In addition, three spruce trees must be moved out of the line of sight for vehicles at the intersection waiting to turn onto Lake Drive. Lighting: No street or yard lighting is shown on the plans. There is no reason to provide any such lighting. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD The Environmental Board reviewed the application on December 3rd. That board recommended denial of the project because of lack if information on surface water management and the medium density designation. The comments are attached.