I don't see any mention of the easements in the permit plans. I assume the easements he needs will basically just be around where the retention ponds and wetlands are in the site plans. I don't expect any conflicts between the drain commissioner and the developers, I would hope that they've been in contact with each other throughout this process.
They'd all of those on the news, before, but they were a bit small so you couldn't make out the detail.
As for coordination between the private and the public, it's not been a sercret that the developers are a bit worried about Lindemann given that he's known for not playing well with others, particularly with developers. He made it clear in even this article that while he wants to do this on an acceptable schedule that he's ultimately bound only by his own schedule, which has rightfully irked the developers a bit. From some back channels I've also heard that the different partners in the project on the private side of things have hashed everything out. Lindemann taking his time gives them an excuse for not being shovel-ready, so I'll be glad when they can no longer blame this on the drain project.
So, I think that while this will work out in the end, but there have been a few moving parts in this and they've not exactly been coordinating with one another. I guess the good news in all of this is that Lindemann is finally putting the ball back in the city and developer's court, so we'll find out in a few days exactly what he needs for his project, and then the city can either accept or reject it. Virg being Virg, while it's likely he'll accept the easements, you can never be 100% sure.
BTW, I've been looking for historical maps and photos showing the original course of the Montgomery Drain and can find nothing. Even the current plans only show only the most general area of the drain. I know where some of the outlets are, but it'd be nice know the original course of the thing.
Just looking through the most recent city council meeting packet (January 11) and it appears the city planning committee unanimously approved the rezoning of the site from A-Residential (which is the zoning of all parkland in the city) to E-1 Apartment Shop to allow for the project to fit into the master plan. E-1 Apartment Shop is the zoning classification that allows for high-density mixed usages. In allowing this kind of usage it allows the highest level of residential density (DM-4 Residential, which allows 87.1 units per acre) along with the highest level density of other uses, too, and a building height of up to 100 feet. Kind of surprise there is no classification for legit residential skyscrapers without a special land use permit.
Anyway, the rezoning is for the 35.3 acres of the site that is not in the 100-year floodplain. This goes to the city council committee on development and planning at their next meeting and then to the full city council.
No, the drainage project will not remove any of those things. Doing the best comparison I can between the site plan and aerial pictures it does look like the drainage project will come very close to taking up all the open land north of the parking lot.
Ranney Park schematic (I believe this is oriented so that east is at the top). The city pulse article on this also directly answers the questions
For Ranney Park he is proposing the installation of eight open ponds, all interconnected with flowing water, using the park's natural slope to move the water. It would also feature natural areas, pavilions, overlooks and paths, all surrounded by a walkway. All of this would be contained north of the baseball diamond, leaving that, the tennis courts and the skate board park untouched. A large hill in the park would remain for sledding.
Much looking forward to the improvements. And if it makes the park more used, perhaps more people will stumble upon the LCC softball games that happen there.
It looks like like it's going to be a larger and improved version of the Tollgate Wetlands, which is a very good thing. I'm still nervous about the Red Cedar project itself though, the way the developers and city officials have talked about it has sort of worried me.
Comments
As for coordination between the private and the public, it's not been a sercret that the developers are a bit worried about Lindemann given that he's known for not playing well with others, particularly with developers. He made it clear in even this article that while he wants to do this on an acceptable schedule that he's ultimately bound only by his own schedule, which has rightfully irked the developers a bit. From some back channels I've also heard that the different partners in the project on the private side of things have hashed everything out. Lindemann taking his time gives them an excuse for not being shovel-ready, so I'll be glad when they can no longer blame this on the drain project.
So, I think that while this will work out in the end, but there have been a few moving parts in this and they've not exactly been coordinating with one another. I guess the good news in all of this is that Lindemann is finally putting the ball back in the city and developer's court, so we'll find out in a few days exactly what he needs for his project, and then the city can either accept or reject it. Virg being Virg, while it's likely he'll accept the easements, you can never be 100% sure.
BTW, I've been looking for historical maps and photos showing the original course of the Montgomery Drain and can find nothing. Even the current plans only show only the most general area of the drain. I know where some of the outlets are, but it'd be nice know the original course of the thing.
Anyway, the rezoning is for the 35.3 acres of the site that is not in the 100-year floodplain. This goes to the city council committee on development and planning at their next meeting and then to the full city council.