My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-10-2004 PC MIN - SPECIAL
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
2000 - 2009
>
2004
>
08-10-2004 PC MIN - SPECIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:35:14 AM
Creation date
5/23/2005 9:26:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
PCM
date
8/10/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />August 10,2004 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />3.1. <br /> <br />EA W for River Park <br /> <br />Rebecca Haug provided an overview of the EA W comments which had been received from <br />Anoka County. The Anoka County comments focused specifically on transportation <br />congestion on Anoka County roads as a result of the development, and a potential trail <br />connection to the Sherburne County Wildlife Refuge from East Twin Lakes Park in Anoka <br />County. <br /> <br />Building and Environmental Administrator Steve Rohlf reviewed the wetland impacts. <br />There is approximately one acre of impact to Type 2 wetlands due to road crossings. The <br />approval of the wetland impacts is predicated on the U.S. Army Cotps accepting the <br />delineations, once the soil borings are submitted. There is also a need to verify that the <br />proposed wetland restoration will not affect upstream flooding. The wetland impacts are <br />recommended for approval with six conditions, plus a seventh condition requiring the <br />Department of Natural Resources and the Army Cotps of Engineers to accept the proposed <br />restoration plan. <br /> <br />3.2. Request By Orrin Thompson Homes for Rezoning of Miske Property from R1d (Single <br />Family Residential) to PUD (planned Unit Development). Public Hearing - Case No. ZC <br />04-06 <br /> <br />3.3. Request by Orrin Thompson Homes for Preliminary Plat Approval of River Park (Miske <br />Property). Public Hearing - Case No. P 04-09 <br /> <br />3.4. <br /> <br />Request by Orrin Thompson Homes for Conditional Use Permit for Residential Planned <br />Unit Development. Public Hearing - Case No. CD 04-15 <br /> <br />Senior Planner Scott Harlicker provided an overview of the staff report. He reviewed the <br />number of units, the street layout, the landscaping concerns with certain areas of housing in <br />Blocks 38 and 40 which are double-frontaged lots, the park areas, and the proposed <br />restorations. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pederson asked for clarification on the total number of units. Mr. Harlicker <br />stated that the total number of units with the revised site layout presented this evening is <br />687. <br /> <br />Commissioner Offerman requested confirmation of on-street parking. Mr. Harlicker <br />indicated that parking would be allowed on one side of the City streets and the main street <br />would allow parking on both sides. The townhome streets would not allow parking. <br /> <br />Commissioner Stevens questioned the placement of the parking areas in Block 38 and 40. <br />He stated that it was highly unusual to have parking in the rear yard of homes. <br /> <br />Chair Ropp asked the status of the County Road 40 improvement and the timing. City <br />Engineer T eny Maurer stated that the City and County have had conversations regarding <br />turning back County Road 40 to the City as a city street. The required right-of-way for this <br />city street is being dedicated as part of this plat. Commissioner Lemke stated that he <br />thought that County Road 40 improvements should be complete prior to development <br />commencing. He stated that transportation movements in East Elk River are difficult and <br />that additional traffic generated by this development would adversely impact Line Avenue <br />and the intersection with County Road 12. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.