Laserfiche WebLink
Case <br /> <br />REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR <br />CHESTNUT HILLS ADDITION <br /> By Mark S. Banwart, Community Development Director <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />The proposed addition is located in the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 26,. <br />Township 32, Range 25, Anoka Count5,, Minnesota, and in portions of Government Lot 3, <br />Section 26, Township 32, Range 25, Anoka County, Minnesota, and a part of the Southwest <br />Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 26, Township 32, Range 25, Anoka Count>', <br />Minnesota. The proposed subdivision has an area of 56 acres and consists of 102 single-family <br />urban residential lots. For your information, the following items are enclosed: <br /> <br />A) <br />B) <br />C) <br />D) <br />E) <br /> <br />F) <br />O) <br />H) <br />I) <br />J) <br />K) <br />L) <br />M) <br />N) <br /> <br />Site location map <br />Proposed subdivision <br />CiB' Engineers review (December 29, 1988) <br />Environmental assessment worksheet (February 24, 1989) <br />Findings of Fact 4~251 Chesmut Hills Environmental assessment worksheet <br />(April 25, 1989) <br />City of Ramsey Resolution #89-04-84 (April 25, 1989) <br />Mn EQB Letter (Ma), 11, 1989) <br />Public hearing notice <br />Public hearing notification list <br />Affidavit of publication <br />Public Hearing Minutes <br />City Engineer's Review (July I7, 1989) <br />Department of the Army Permit (89-1158-12) (O:.tober 3, 1989) <br />City Engineer's Review (May 15, 1990) <br /> <br />Observations: <br /> <br />On September 15, 1988, the Ramsey Parks and Recreation gave concept approval to a centralized <br />pa.rk for Windemere Woods, Cedar Hills and Chestnut Hills proposed subdivisions. At the <br />O::tober 20, 1988 meeting of the Rarnsey Parks and Recreation commission, a motion was made <br />and carried to deny that portion of land offered by Windemere Woods Addition, Cedar Hills <br />Addition and Chestnut Hills Addition to satisfy the ciD"s park dedication requirements for the three <br />proposed subdivisions be:ause a po~on of t~e said pror~ertv is wetland. TheSe '" <br /> . . a,.veto~.s met <br />several times with Cin' Staff regarding conce."ns of the sub.4ivision layout (~..., r~arks, n-ails, <br />n-'an spor'mtion, etc.). <br /> <br />The developers presented their PARK CONCEPT PLAN to the Ramsey Pm-ks and Recreation <br />Commission on December 8, 1988, "Fne joint proposal was reviewe, d bv the Pm-ks and Recreation <br />Commission. The consensus of the Commission was to acceet the overall concern along wflh the <br />u-ail to the north but not to make a motion for ...... ',, '~ ::"e CommisSion receives the <br />re. qu'k~..d plats showing the entire area of the three developments, ~ the ~-aJ.! a!i~menu and p~biic <br />~se areas. <br /> <br />On Novem~: 15, 1988, the Ramsev City Coun.m :,'-.'":,',~ ':~ ' ' <br /> . . au ..... x~,, 'qO Anderson, deveioeer Cedaz <br />":~n,,.~ Addition to make .'~v~ .' effor, to n.._o.a..'~ ': '~ mn access for th, So,',;-~s~-'~ ' portion of ma:' <br />su~ivision to CounD' Road gi 16. <br /> <br />90 <br /> <br /> <br />