12/13/2000 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board November 8, 2000 Page 6 Mr. Corson asked if a lift station would be possible for the proposed development. Staff indicated this would be a possibility but noted the lift station would require additional maintenance on the part of the City. Mr. Johnson noted Old Birch Street may require maintenance before this development could be completed. Chair Schaps concurred. John Hill, Heritage Development, reviewed his concept plan with the Commission for the Saddle Club property. He noted out of the 40 acres on this site approximately 26 acres would be built on. Mr. Hill indicated he felt a trail through this development would be difficult if sought around the exterior of the development. He stated trails could be placed on this site but not at the rear lot lines. Chair Schaps asked for the trade offs provided by the developer to the City for a PUD development status. Mr. Hill indicated there would be a significant amount of open space and common space for all residents within the devel •, ' ent. Chair Schaps indicated concern for the impact would be in favor of this development if deer concurred. Id Birch Street. He stated he 25% in density. Mr. Johnson Mr. Hill stated by decreasing the den th r "price would be increased. He noted this may be risky due to the fact the m warrant lot prices over $80,000 in this area. Mr. Hill indicated as propos o F should draw roughly $40,000 per lot. Mr. Rafferty stated concern sity at this time. Mr. Hill noted he feels the PUD common space was the best w dress this lot with the large number of wetlands. Chair Schaps stated he is concerned with the price level at this time. Staff added that the City needs to see some flexibility with the density and trail options. He asked that the developer come up with a more fair trade off by either preserving more open space or by decreasing the density to roughly 50 lots. Chair Schaps concurred and asked if the developer would be flexible in reducing the density of this development. Mr. Johnson noted he doesn't want to see the prices increased too greatly. He indicated this would be the case if the density were to be decreased. Mr. Rafferty raised concern for the lack of a park in this development for children. Mr. Hill noted a change could be made to lots 33 and 35 to allow for a tot lot. Mr. Corson indicated he was not in favor of the development as proposed due to the density and lack of trade offs. Mr. Rafferty concurred. • • •