Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 05/10/2001

Home

REQUEST FOR SKETCH PLAN REVIEW OF WILDLIFE SANCTUARY ADDITION; CASE OF GOR-EM, LLC By: Principal Planner Patrick Trudgeon Background: Gor-Era, L.L.C., represented by John Jackels has applied for sketch plan approval to develop 31.42 acres along Hwy. 47. Gor-Em, L.L.C. is proposing to develop 37 single-family lots. The development is proposed'to be located on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, of Wildlife Sanctuary plat The following items are enclosed: a) b) c) Site location map Sketch plan City StaffReview Letter dated April 27, 2001 Notification: No surrounding properties were notified of the sketch plan submittal. The property will need to be pIatted and rezoned and notification Mil be required for the preliminary pIat and rezoning public hearings. Observations: The property is currently zoned R-IR, Single Family. The applicant will be asking for a rezoning of the property to R1-U as the property has been located with Ramsey MUSA since 1995. The draft Comprehensive Plan shows this area as being developed as Low Density Urban Residential. The property contains 31.42 acres with 15.14 acres being reserved as Outlot A. 12.96 acres of Outlot A is classified as weft-ands. The sketch plan shows a gross density of 1.18 units per acre. When Outlot A (which includes the wetlands) are factored out, the net density for the whole development is 2.27 units per acre. The proposed single-family lots directly adjoin large resident/al lots to the north and southeast. Outlot A abuts large residential lots to the west and south. The eastern part of the property abuts State I-Iighway 47. The City does not currently require any buffering or transifioning between large rural lots and smaller urban-sized lots. The wetlands buffer the new development fi.om the lots to the west and most of the lots to the south. However two larger lots to the north and one lot to the south will directly abut the new urban-sized lots. The Planning Commission may want to discuss possible transifioning and buffeting options with the developer. Most of the lots appear to meet the minimum standard for lot area and lot width at the front setback line. Staff' is asking for clarification of the lot width of Lot 2, Block 3 as it appears to be shghtly deficient of the 80' lot width requ/rement The development will gain primary access fi.om St. Francis Blvd. (State I-Iighway 47). Staff h.as reviewed secondary accesses and recommends that the developer construct a connection to 157m Lane,' N.W. to the north. As this route will go through some undeveloped land before it reaches the Apple Ridge/R/ver Pines subdivision, the City and the Developer will have to coordinate the route with the landowners. .,.,. 33