Laserfiche WebLink
CASE <br /> <br /> CASE OF GUARDIAN CONSTRUCTION <br />By: Zoning Administratrator Sylvia Frolik <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />Guardian Constru~Ction has applied for sketch plan review of their proposal to develop townhomes <br />on the multi~family parcel in Sunfish Square. The following items are enclosed for your <br />information: <br /> <br /> a) Sit¢~ location map <br /> b) Sketch plan <br /> c) Le~er from Anoka County regarding Sunfish Square dated 10/1/93 <br /> d) Ci~ Staft review letter dated February 2, 1995 <br /> <br />Observations:~ <br /> <br />The multi-family routlot is 8.7 acres in size and the developer has proposed 70 townhome units <br /> <br />which equates to <br />will ente~' the plat <br /> <br />Ramsey's City Co( <br />none of these are <br />minimum house s <br />basically the footp: <br />house size. Lot c <br />townhome footpri~ <br /> <br />units per acre. The townhomes are proposed to served by a private road that <br />gom I42nd Street N.W. and Vanadium Street N.W. <br /> <br />le establishes regulations for single family, duplex and multi-unit structures, but <br />easily applicable to a townhouse plat. City Staff is recommending that the <br />[ze be the same as for single family units. Since lots in a townhome plat are <br />5nts of the home, then the minimum lot size would be the same as the minimum <br />>verage in the Multiple Residential District is 35%; therefore, the total of ali <br />Its should not exceed 35% of 8.7 acres. <br /> <br />Park dedication will be determined by the Park and Recreation Commission. It is anticipated that it <br />will consist of a calgh payment and possibly a recreational area. The developer will also be required <br />to install a bituminous pathway along County Road 4/57 which is not park dedication credit <br />eligible. <br /> <br />Although 6 - 9 u~its per acre appears to be the norm for townhouse developments, Staff is <br />concerned that the!sketch plan proposes a sufficient amount of green space and off-street parking <br />for visitors. <br /> <br />Some concern was <br />the time Sunfish S <br />the commercial lot <br />County's comment <br />access from Count <br /> <br />expressed by Commissioner Deemer that per the comments of Anoka County at <br />[uare was platted, the multi-family parcel should make provisions for access to <br />rather than having access from either of the County roads. In reviewing Anoka <br />;, it appears that they assumed the commercial lot will eventually be requesting <br /> Roads//57 and 4/116. <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />The Planning Cor~mission should review the sketch, give direction for any amendments and <br />authorize the developer to proceed to preliminary plat. <br /> <br />CommissiOn Action: <br /> <br /> Motion to: <br /> Recommen~ that the developer make any recommended amendments to Parkshire North as <br /> directed b~ the Planning Commission and the Park and Recreation Commission and <br /> proceed to greliminary plat. <br /> <br />Review Checklist: ~ City Engineer <br /> Parks & Utilities Supervisor <br />PC: ~ 2/7/95 <br /> <br /> <br />