My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
#16 - Highpointe Crossing Preliminary Plat and OP PUD
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2020's
>
2024
>
08-20-24
>
#16 - Highpointe Crossing Preliminary Plat and OP PUD
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/19/2025 1:35:27 PM
Creation date
10/18/2024 2:17:42 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
89
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
Highpointe Crossing - 2298 Inwood Ave N – Lake Elmo – Preliminary Plat Narrative <br />June 7, 2024 <br />Page 21 <br /> <br />21 <br /> <br />• Storm Water Treatment <br />o One of the refinements from the sketch plan includes reducing the number of storm <br />water ponds and centralizing more water into the larger pond in the southeast corner of <br />the property. This was done to help keep as much water as possible in the pond that will <br />be irrigating a large portion of the property. <br /> <br />o The OP code asks that ponds and water conveyance features be placed in City outlots. <br />We were unsure how to best do that. Since the HOA will be maintaining the restoration <br />work within all the open spaces it seemed better to have the ponds and drainage swales <br />be located in drainage and utility easements giving the city access and maintenance <br />rights but having the outlots still be owned by the HOA. If the City would like outlots <br />that they own we can accommodate that but would like to know where and how those <br />outlots should be arranged and located. <br /> <br />• Park <br />o On November 20, 2023 the Park Commission reviewed the Highpointe Crossing Sketch <br />Plan and determined that they would prefer a payment of cash in leu of a land <br />dedication. Therefore, no public park areas are shown within the Preliminary Plat. <br /> <br />K - Development Standards/Infrastructure/Other <br />• Roadway Width – OP code states that streets shall comply with the engineering standards. The <br />engineering standards have street standards listed in multiple locations. Both seem to indicate <br />that a 28’ F-F wide residential roadway is acceptable. Excerpt from engineering standard <br />included below. <br /> <br />o Minimum Street Widths, Measured from Face of Curb to Face of Curb (F‐F) <br />▪ New Local Residential Streets (with parking on both sides) - 32‐feet F‐F <br />▪ Local Residential Street (when parking is allowed on one‐side) - 28‐feet F‐F <br />o Minimum Right‐of‐way Widths <br />▪ Local Multi‐Family Residential Street (32 feet wide) - 66‐feet ROW <br />▪ Local Single Family or Twinhome Residential Street (28‐feet wide) - 60‐feet ROW <br /> <br />There is also a section in the engineering standards on Low Impact Design Practices. This <br />section encourages the use of: <br />o Open Space Developments (Such as the OP-PUD) <br />o Narrow streets (Like the 28’ Standard) <br />o Stormwater reuse (Which we are including) <br />o Vegetated Swales (which we are also using to convey water across the site) <br />Since we are using a conservation design, we are using the roadway listed for low impact design <br />practices identified in the Engineering Standards. We believe that there will be sufficient <br />parking with one-sided parking.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.