My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1-31-2006 Special meeting regarding NWQ (2)
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
PLANNING
>
Minutes
>
2006
>
1-31-2006 Special meeting regarding NWQ (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2021 9:46:24 PM
Creation date
4/16/2007 4:54:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Approved <br /> J <br /> building's 46,47, and 48. They will be doing site plan revisions for the northern entrance to <br /> accommodate the realignment of the road and the storm water retention pond. <br /> Zisla inquired if there was any additional information regarding public art. Fernelius replied that <br /> Steve Rymer, Director of Parks and Recreation, has been working with Ingraham and Associates <br /> on the Strategic Parks and Trails Plan and public art is a sub-category in the plan. It is very early <br /> in the process, in terms of where public art will go, however there are several opportunities with <br /> in the current site plan, to incorporate public art, but there are no specific plans as of yet. Zisla <br /> asked where the public art would go with in the current site plan. Fernelius stated that the main <br /> park area and public right-of-way are just two of the areas that can accommodate public art. <br /> Greenfield added that they are willing to work with the City in incorporating public art through <br /> out the site. Zisla wondered why the City and the Developer do not have more specifics within <br /> the site plan. He is concerned that once the preliminary site plan has been approved, the <br /> Developer will not follow through with the ideas that have not been written into the plans. <br /> Fernelius responded that while public art is an important topic the specific decisions have not <br /> been made. Baker stated that the concern is that there is nothing stating who will be making the <br /> final decisions on what the public art is. Fernelius replied that the topic of public art is fairly new <br /> and the City would like to hold community meetings about what they would like to see for art, so <br /> the City is not ready to give specifics. <br /> Schiferl asked staff to clarify if this is an approval of the site plan and a preliminary plat or a <br /> preliminary site plan. Fernelius replied that it is a preliminary PUD, which has a two-step <br /> process,which requires the Developers to come back for a final approval of the plat,the PUD and <br /> the site plan. Schiferl stated that on the Resolution for Approval, under the Be It So Resolved, <br /> Item 2 states "Approval of Site Plan Submittal," it is does not state preliminary site plan. He <br /> added that if this site plan has to come back before the Commission it will make a big difference <br /> in some of the concerns that the commissioners have. Fernelius responded that this is a <br /> preliminary site plan and that the Developers understand that. The Commissioners can direct <br /> Staff to change the wording in the resolution to read preliminary site plan. O'Keefe inquired <br /> what a preliminary plat means for the City and the Developer. Fernelius replied that the <br /> preliminary plat defines the legal boundaries of the site,where the right of way easements will be <br /> located, and where they will construct the town homes. It becomes the basis for the final plat <br /> which will be recorded with the county. <br /> Zisla asked staff if the Developers or the City fail to get the right of way access for the trails will <br /> the trails no longer be part of the plan or will the whole development be thrown out. Fernelius <br /> replied that the City is not anticipating any problems, in fact the Minnesota Commercial Railroad <br /> and MT Properties have seen the proposed site plan and they have indicated a willingness to work <br /> with the City. He added that if the right of way is not secured, then the City would not be able to <br /> offer the access to the trails, but the development would not be in jeopardy. Baker proposed <br /> adding a number 24 to the Resolution of Approval requiring street and trail easements on the final <br /> plat. Zisla asked the Commission if any one else had an issue with making the residential streets <br /> private, yet asking for an easement to allow foot and bicycle traffic. O'Keefe replied that the <br /> Commission would not be asking for a traffic easement, but an easement for utilities and <br /> drainage. He also stated that he doesn't see why the association would not allow foot and bike <br /> traffic, and that they would have a difficult time regulating it. <br /> O'Keefe recommended to staff that in Item 22 the word"should"be changed to"shall". <br /> C:\Documents and Settings\jgoepe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK28\1-31-2006 Special <br /> meeting regarding NWQ.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.