My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
06/27/2001 Env Bd Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Environmental Board
>
Packets
>
2001
>
06/27/2001 Env Bd Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2014 3:49:13 PM
Creation date
7/31/2014 9:35:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Environmental Board
Env Bd Document Type
Env Bd Packet
Meeting Date
06/27/2001
Env Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
155
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
environmental amenities. Conservation development principles are not <br />employed. They should be. <br />• It does not seem to be good planning to have lots with driveways on the <br />collector streets (12th Ave. and Holly Dr.). Removing those lots would better <br />allow for conservation of open space and desirable attributes within the <br />development. <br />• The street appears to be longer than needed. Make it shorter. <br />• Include the standard recommendations as listed on the developer check list <br />from the EB. <br />Environmental Board member Trehus made a motion to deny approval of 12th <br />and Holly project until the Environmental Board has had an opportunity to <br />review an adequate tree inventory and vegetation management plan. <br />Motion 2nd by Connie Grundhofer <br />Motion approved /All in favor. <br />Highland Meadows West 3rd Addition <br />Findings: <br />1. Highland Meadows West 3rd addition is not a Conservation Development. <br />2. The Highland Meadows West 3rd Addition development proposal plans for a <br />significant tree loss. <br />3. The Oak Savanna on the west end of the parcel should and many other trees on <br />site should be preserved, and this could be made possible through utilization of <br />conservation development principles and a P.D.O. <br />4. The Environmental Board did not have adequate information on surface water <br />management. <br />Recommendations: <br />1. If this proposal moves forward essentially as it stands, this developer should <br />satisfy the city that all steps possible have been taken to preserve trees. To <br />accomplish this with the existing plat, it seemed appropriate to reduce the scope <br />of the grading plan, which may dictate the building of structures without walkout <br />basements. The developer has objected to this suggestion, but has not <br />demonstrated that satisfying the city's concerns about the trees constitutes a <br />hardship. <br />Motion by Mike Trehus: <br />• Page 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.