My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-06-07 CC.PC Master Dev WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
03-06-07 CC.PC Master Dev WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2007 10:22:14 AM
Creation date
4/18/2007 11:33:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
CC/PC TCAAP Minutes
General - Type
Minutes
Date
3/6/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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 />Meeting Minutes - TCAAP City CouncilPlanning Commission Worksession <br /> <br />7. Summary of Questions/Comments- <br /> <br />Like the small amount of split retail at Highway 10. <br />Prefer the high density residential in concept B. <br />Like the view corridors at the ends of the roadways that provide views <br />into the Kame area. <br />Like the central open space strategy of concept B. <br />Like the office park along Highway 96. <br />Like the low density residential in concept B. <br />Prefer to see some retail below higher density residential in some areas. <br />Can there be a walkway or roadway along the National Guard fence <br />along the east side ofthe site? <br />Since those may be some of the more expensive single family lots, we <br />may not want to put a pathway between the homes and the fence. <br />Maybe better to handle with berming and landscape buffering. Provide <br />deeper lots to accommodate this. <br />A roadway along the fence would double up the infrastructure needed <br />there and be more costly. <br />Would the ponding in the central open space be crossed with bridges? <br />The Vision Framework showed this. Maybe too many bridges shown on <br />the Vision Framework. <br />The ponds can be done without all bridge crossings. <br />Like the open flow of the central park and open space in schemes A and <br />B. <br />Will the central open space be programmed with uses similar to <br />Centennial Lakes in Edina? They may be progranuned but the design <br />would likely be more naturalistic. <br />Concepts A and B foster a good sense of neighborhood. <br />Concept C fosters a better sense of neighborhood, maybe it's the curvy <br />roads that might slow down traffic more? <br />Like to see residential uses at Highway 96. <br />Would like to see some open space and small amount of neighborhood <br />commercial at Hwy 96. One of the concepts should indicate this idea. <br />Can the civic program use be located at Highway 96? <br />Maybe the civic use is better located near the higher density and retail <br />uses to the north. <br />How about a roundabout in concept B, near the high density residential? <br />Like the retail near the high density residential on concept B <br />Maybe the low density residential should touch portions of the open <br />space on concept B? <br /> <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.