6.8. SR 05-17-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo to Mayor & City Councib/P 04-02 April 19, 2004 Page 6 requirements, the grading plan should be revised to eliminate the ~ading on Oudot A, except for those areas needed for park development purposes. Planninq Commission Meefinq of February 24th At the Planning Commission meeting held on February 242, the Commission considered the applicant's requests for a zone change to PUD, a conditional use permit for the PUD and preliminary plat. Following considerable public comment from the residents of Nordic Woods and concerns raised by the Commission, the Commission tabled the requests to the March 23rd meeting. Summary. of Issues Pub/i: · · · · · Increased traffic Tree removal and the spread of oak wilt The undersized lots are not consistent with the lots in Nordic Woods Impact of drainage on creek The proposed development is too dense Czm~s/on · Project is too dense · Drainage · Tree removal and the spread of oak wilt · Increased traffic · Design standards as part of PUD · The project needed more amenities as part of PUD · Would like tree inventory and additional trees planted as part of PUD After considering the comments and concerns raised at the February 24~h meeting, the applicant has decided to withdraw his requests for a zone change to PUD and the conditional use permit for the PUD. He is moving forward with a revised conventional plat under the current Rlc (Single Family Residential) zoning. Planninq Commission Meefinq of March 25th At the Planning Commission meeting held on March 25th, two neighbors spoke at the public hearing. One neighbor was concerned about the tree loss and the other was concerned about traffic. Park and Recreation Commissioners Kuester and Niziolek also spoke against the project citing concerns about tree removal and preserving a 200 foot buffer along the Great Northern Trail. Staff and the applicant presented an alternative designs that provided a 147 foot buffer along the trail. The majority of the Commission was concerned that the property was not suitable for the type or density of development proposed by the applicant. One Commission thought S:M~LANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland I-lills\P04-02cc4-19.doc