My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 05/22/2001
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2001
>
Agenda - Council - 05/22/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 12:22:24 PM
Creation date
9/4/2003 12:19:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
05/22/2001
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
313
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
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Commissioner Watson noted this revision will prevent the construction of a pond of a certain <br />size. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski reviewed the wording on Page 36 and noted the exemptions where <br />mining and Fading permits are not required. He stated it is known that some residents want to <br />dig a small-sized pond and if all the regulations are complied with, it may be exempt from <br />needing a permit. However, all of the other restrictions would apply such as the placement of the <br />material dug out of the pond or causing a drainage problem for adjacent properties. He advised <br />this threshold is used by the Army Corps of Engin'eers. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt noted the Ciiy has lot sizes that vary geatly and asked if there is a limit to the <br />surface area of the pond for a smaller-sized residential lot. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski stated one of the amendments would indicate that no alteration of Fade <br />is allowed in an area with an approved gading plan. Since ali of the smaller lot urban <br />subdivisions have approved ~ading plans, that type of scenario would not be allowed. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt suggested that some type of restriction on size be considered for smaller <br />residential lots. He read Section 9.11.18, Subdivision 3, (c) and suggested it should indicate <br />"does n.ot interfere with surface drainage in the area ..." <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski ageed that the Code should be corrected to indicate "does not." He <br />stated Staff will make that revision and also add language to address the issue raised by <br />Chairperson Nixt prior to Council consideration. He reviewed the maximum gTading slope <br />(12%) that is allowed in residential subdivision. <br /> <br />For future reference, Chairperson Nixt asked staff to determine whether the Apple Ridge/River <br />Pines subdivision complies with that maximum slope g-fade restriction. He also asked that this <br />issue be raised during the future ordinance amendment discussion. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wivoda asked if this just impacts residential properties or would' it also impact <br />soccer fields. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski stated that soccer fields are probably at a 2% grade. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked staff to prepare th/s revision and present the modified ordnance at the <br />next meeting. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik stated the City will readvertise the public heating for <br />the next meeting. <br /> <br />COMlVlISSION BUSINESS <br /> <br />Case #4: <br /> <br />Request for Sketch Plan Review of a Minor Subdivision, Sunfish Commons; <br />Case of Sunfish Properties, L.L.C. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/April 3, 2001 <br /> Page 9 of 18 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.