Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Heritage Maples <br />October 17, 2005 <br /> <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />Preliminary Plat <br /> <br />A preliminary plat for 52 townhouse lots is being proposed. The plat includes platting <br />Yankton Street from the north boundary of West Oaks to intersect with the proposed <br />service road. The plat is consistent with the current site plan. <br /> <br />Grading, Drainage and Utilities <br /> <br />Grading, drainage and utility issues are addressed in the City Engineer's memo. <br /> <br />Park and Recreation <br /> <br />The Park and Recreation Commission recommended cash to meet the park dedication <br />requirements. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Meeting <br /> <br />At the Planning Commission meeting held on September 27th, two adjacent property owners <br />spoke at the public hearing. Both of them were residents of Big Lake Township and felt that <br />senior housing was a good use of the property. They wanted additional landscaping between <br />their homes and the townhomes. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission had a lengthy discussion on this project. Three of the five <br />Commissioners thought that the land use amendment was appropriate. Two of the <br />Commissioners were not convinced that residential was the right use and the property <br />should remain commercial. The Commission believed that the number of issues raised in the <br />City Engineer's memo were important enough that they needed to be addressed by the <br />applicant prior to the project moving forward. They compared the project with the R3 <br />(Townhouse District) setback requirements; the project does not meet the minimum 30 <br />setback requirement. The Commission asked the applicant if he would be willing to agree to <br />table the requests and address the issues raised by staff and the Commission. The applicant <br />wanted to move all the requests forward to the City Council. Hearing that, the Commission <br />made the following recommendations: <br /> <br />Land Use Amendment <br /> <br />The Commission voted 4: 1 to recommend denial of the proposed land use amendment from <br />CC (Community Commercial) to UR (Urban Residential) based on the following findings: <br /> <br />1. The times and conditions have not changed to warrant the land use amendment. <br />2. The property has frontage on a major highway. <br />3. The proposed land use amendment is not consistent with the current zoning of the <br />property. <br /> <br />S:\PLANNING\Case Files\2005\P 05-16 Heritage Maples\P05-016CClO-17.doc <br />