CCP 01-29-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1. The proposed outlots, A and B, do not meet the minimum requirements for a developable lot and will not be developed in the future, as platted; 2. All proposed easements, newly created or vacated as per the submitted plan, must be properly filed and recorded with Ramsey County and proof of this action provided to the City; and 3. Application must be made for a final plat no later than three moths after action is taken on this application by the City Councilor the preliminary plat becomes void. The Planning Commission also offered the following comments on the Concept PUD: 1. Concept A appears to meet the intent of the Gateway Business District more than Concept B by offering a greater architectural presence, taking full advantage of the site's location; 2. The conflicting text regarding the maximum height requirement and percentage of office within the District should be discussed and clarified by the City to encourage the goals as established by the Gateway Business District language; 3. Exterior building finishes should utilize brick, stone, glass or some combination of these materials, compatible with what exists within the District; 4. The proposed western entrances to the site should be relocated to eliminate two 90 degree comers; 5. Entrances to the property should be considered opposite to those that exist on the north side of Gateway Boulevard; 6. Reconstruction of the intersection of Gateway Boulevard and Round Lake Road should be considered to accommodate development; 7. Consideration should be given to budgeting for Round Lake Road improvements by the City; 8. Consideration and discussion of the use and acquisition of the railway bridge in conjunction with this development, the City of New Brighton and the County needs to occur; 9. Development of the site should include a pedestrian trail along the south side of Gateway Boulevard andlor within the site; 10. Further consideration to setbacks from the surface parking areas should be made since neither proposal meets the minimum requirements; 11. Existing wetlands and ponds should be interconnected with proposed ponds and wetlands for maximum circulation of runoff and positive flood control; 12. Final outlet of the wetland system should use the City's storm water pond on the western portion ofthe site; 13. Movement of the City's storm water pond to the east, as proposed, is not recommended; and 14. Wetland mitigation should consider the existing trunk sanitary sewer since this would not be relocated by the City when other options may exist. Updates None at this time. 6 , , . . e e