My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-06-11-PC
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2010-2019
>
PC Packets 2011
>
04-06-11-PC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/9/2015 3:15:34 PM
Creation date
4/4/2011 9:44:59 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
93
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
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—March 9,201 l 3 <br /> 3.A. Planning Case 11-004; Concept Plan Review; Pulte Development Group: 4500 .Snelling <br /> • Avenue North—Not a Public Hearing(continued) <br /> Commissioner Hames asked what changes were made on the corner of Keithson Drive <br /> since the community meeting. She also asked if this development would require a park <br /> dedication fee. <br /> Mr. McDaris stated the street was rounded out but he could not say if extra boulevard had <br /> been added. <br /> City Planner Beekman explained all subdivisions within the City require a park <br /> dedication. This component could be 10 percent of the value of the project_ 10 percent of <br /> the land, or a combination of these. There are set rules the City must follow regarding the <br /> use of these funds. The funds can only be used to expand or maintain the City's Parks. <br /> The City has not finalized the park dedication component with the applicant and the Parks <br /> and Recreation Committee will be discussing this at the next meeting. <br /> Mr. McDaris stated Rice Creek Watershed would need to review the drainage on the <br /> property. Rice Creek Watershed has received the preliminary plans and they should have <br /> feedback regarding the plan by the April 6 Planning Commission meeting. <br /> Commissioner Scott stated it would be worth looking into increasing the setbacks for the <br /> wetland areas. <br /> • Commissioner Haines asked what other restrictions could be put on the applicant if the <br /> process was moved to a PUD. She also asked if the size of home that could be built on <br /> the property would be different if the front _yard setbacks were moved toward the street. <br /> City Planner Beekman explained a new set of plans would need to be done. With the <br /> PUD process the City would have the flexibility to grant the setbacks that would increase <br /> the wetland buffer and the City's easement. <br /> Mr. McDaris stated he would not be able to determine if the size of home would be <br /> different at this time. Pulte Group would like to move forward with the plans being <br /> presented at this time and not go through the PUD process. He explained Pulte Group <br /> would be willing to work with the City regarding the wetland buffer and not have to go <br /> through the PUD process. He explained moving the homes closer to the street would <br /> change the feel of the neighborhood. The plan being proposed meets all the City_ 's <br /> requirements and should be able to move forward. <br /> Commissioner Thompson stated she would like to know what the Rice Creek Watershed <br /> District has established for wetland setbacks. She also expressed concerns about the <br /> drainage of the property from lot to lot. <br /> Commissioner Modesette asked for clarification regarding the wetland protections for <br /> delineated and non-delineated wetlands. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.