Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />April 11, 2001 <br />Page 6 <br />Generally speaking, NAC believed a better site design could be created to address transition to <br />existing and future land uses and to respect the natural features on the site. <br />Utilities /Grading and Drainage: The office of the City Engineer had reviewed the application <br />and comments were attached related to these items. <br />Transportation: There were two accesses proposed, both onto County roads. The location and <br />design of the intersections were under County jurisdiction. No comments had been received to <br />date. County permits would be required. She stated Ware Road would be realigned at some <br />point in the future so it would line up. <br />Parks and Trails: This site was adjacent to the County park. No additional land dedication <br />was required. Park dedication would be cash fees in lieu of land and would be paid in the <br />amount in effect at the time of final plat. Staff stated the Park Board had reviewed this and <br />suggested cash. <br />There was historically a trail proposed by the County in the vicinity of this plan. However, that <br />trail had been eliminated from the County's plan and therefore, no connection was necessary <br />through this area. <br />Site Plan: The area proposed for townhomes required a full submittal regarding site layout, <br />parking unit design, unit exteriors, landscaping, etc. Because of the number and location of the <br />units, NAC believes all details related to the proposal should be part of this review. <br />Wetlands: There were 8.84 acres of wetlands on the property. Some were proposed to be <br />filled to accommodate road crossings. The wetland delineation and related plans were subject to <br />the review and permitting of Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD), which oversaw the <br />Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). It was the City staff s policy to require preliminary approval <br />from RCWD before City staff recommends final action by the Planning and Zoning Board. <br />Staff recommended continuing the public hearing to allow time for additional information as <br />outlined in the planning report. <br />Mr. Lyden stated he would like to see a trail around the lake, and wanted the ability to add a trail <br />in the future considered for this proposed development. <br />Chair Schaps opened the, public hearing at 7 :07 p.m. <br />Mr. Corson asked about the boundary south of Ware Road and if the remaining land was part of <br />this plat development. Ms. Sherman replied it was part of the open space of Lot 3. <br />Mr. Corson asked if the neighborhood commercial area was changed from the previous plan and <br />was any buffer proposed to the existing area to the east of the site. Ms. Sherman replied there <br />was an existing tree line, which might or might not stay in total. She stated they had not seen <br />any plans with respect to landscaping, but when it was received, it would be thoroughly reviewed <br />and this would be taken into consideration. <br />Colleen Bruster ( ?sp), 6591 Hokah Drive, indicated she had a number of concerns about this <br />plan. She stated she was concerned about the traffic and stated with this development that would <br />• <br />• <br />