Laserfiche WebLink
Case #11: Request for a Zoning Amendment to Chapter 9 Section 9~:~.04'~?~ome <br /> Occupations, Case of Lonny Menard <br /> <br /> ~5~~ ' ~. '::~, . <br /> ..... ~i~V '~,~% . . <br /> Morton by Co~ssmner So,son, seconded by Chm~son N~xt to co~e the~!~c he~ng <br /> for the request for a zoning ~endment to Chapter 9 Section 9.11.0~4fintil the J~0, 2003 <br /> Ramsey Pl~ng Co~ission meet~g. <br /> <br /> Morton Came& Voting Yes: Chm~erson N~xt, Co~ms~:O~ees~;~o~son(~Brauer, <br /> Van Scoy and Watson. Vot~g No: None. Absent: <br /> <br /> Case gl: Request for Pre~nary Plat ApproVal of Tiger Meadows; Case of MonarCh:' <br /> <br /> Presentation ~..: .~;:¢~ '~?:: ' <br /> <br /> Associate Pla~er Megan Wald advised that Monarch Home'~5~&s submi~ed a prelimin~ plat to <br /> develop prope~y located east of Tiger Street and no~h of ~S~0ng Blv&~Bhe expla~ed ~e <br /> applicant is proposing to plat 11,;~w single-fmily rural lots ~fl~;}g e~/s2~g homestead. She <br /> noted ~e proposed lots meet 0~5~::~ 2.5-acre ~nimum lot s~.:~m~uirement in the Rural <br /> Developing ~ea. Each lot wi~%'~:'~e~;¢~:~:m:~n-site septic System:~ private well, ~d ~1 of <br /> the lots meet or exceed the~500-fee~?~b~ s~eet ~;~?~renuirement. <br /> <br /> Associate Pla~er Wald stated ~e d;~lopmd~::~is proposi~::fo ga~ access ~om Tiger Street. <br /> She advised that the prelimina~ plat {~:::.als~oviding fo~~ ~mre access to the no~h ~at will <br /> someday co~ect,to,Rabbit Street. ~e ~i~t]min~ plat i'~:~also proposing to extend Rabbit S~eet <br /> to the southe~i~';~b~er of the plat bou~a~ line in order to provide an oppo~ for a ~mre <br /> co~ectionS~:~0 Nutria ~.~eet, locmed in ~mm~::Heights subdivision i~nediately east of ~e <br /> subject::~P3'~pe~. ,She~dicated mat pr° :f°r ~s oppo~W results ~ Rabbit S~eet <br /> exceeding me ciw s 60¢:foot cul-de-sac le~h requkements by 357 feet (total len~h of Rabbit <br /> <br />Associate ~:~e;~'ald.,. reminded the Co~ssi°n ~at ~e Ci, received a re-subdivision pl~ <br />.during sketch ~t~:..review. However, staff is requesting ~e developer submit the re-subdivision <br />· ~::pl:an:~ pan of th[::3~l~n~ plat to .allow staff to review the plan ~n more detail. Staff is also <br />reco~end~g that :t~&,,de~Bper reevaluate where the location of ~e house pads are being <br />proposefl:i~s the prelim:i~:plat. She explained it appears ~at several of the house pad locations <br />will not P'~ide for th~;host effective and efficient me~s for ~mre re-subdivision in the event <br />CiW se~ic~::~e extended to the subject med. She stated Staff is reco~ending ~at the area <br />encomp~se~}~:~by Lots 1 and 2 be subdivided ~to two lots with a no~Wsou~ bound~ line as <br />opposed t~i~}~e easffwest bound~ line shorn on'the prelimina~ plat. Providing for a <br />no~sou~bounda~ l~e would allow ~e prop~ to gain access to 170t~ Avenue in ~e event <br />':,?5.:the hom~:~%as raised or dredged beyond 50% of it value, thereby eli~nating ~ access onto <br />· C0,gg~-Road 8~. She advised Staff ~s reco~endln~ prehm~na~ plat approval, cont~gent upon <br />.cbmPliance wi~ CiW Staff Review LeRer dated May 30, 2003. <br /> <br /> ChaiCers0n Nixt opened ~e public hearing at 7:40 p.m. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/June 5, 2003 <br /> page 3 of <br /> <br />-261- <br /> <br /> <br />