My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 02/06/2003
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2003
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 02/06/2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 4:00:07 PM
Creation date
4/28/2003 2:10:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
02/06/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
Principal Planner Trudgeon indicated they were 2.5 to 3 per acre. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked how many units would need to be removed if this were not a PUD. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon indicated 28 units would need to be removed. <br /> <br />Mr. Hoover asked how big the lots are in this proposal. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon indicated they were 5400 to 8500 square feet. <br /> <br />Mr. Hoover indicated he lived in Champlin and the lots were 10,000 square feet and were very <br />small. He stated some of these are half of that. He indicated most of his neighbors have room <br />for a shed or an extra garage, but that will not be possible in this development. He feels 115 <br />units is too many for that size property, and asked who benefits from this higher density. He <br />stated if Ramsey needs a more dense community, it should be put in an appropriate spot, noting <br />there was higher density by Casey's, which sits between the Industrial Park and a residential area. <br />He stated when you increase density in this location you are setting a precedence for the property <br />to the north, and higher density there. He encouraged the Commission to use other appropriate <br />areas, such as next to busier streets and next to the industrial park, for higher density. He asked <br />about the ponds, and how deep they were, if they were safe for all the children in the area, <br />indicating they need to be able to crawl out, but he does not want to look at weeds in a dry year. <br />Mr. Hoover mentioned that a lot has been said about saving trees, but with the current plan a lot <br />of trees will be gone, adding that with a denser subdivision you will ultimately lose more trees. <br />He stated if they just put 70 single-family homes in the 28 acres they would save more trees. <br /> <br />Julie Horn, 6031 145th Lane NW stated she would love to see the trails go. She would prefer to <br />see the funds used for something else. She indicated there is a pedestrian trail on the other side <br />of Sunwood Drive, and if there is another trail there is also sealcoating and maintenance costs. <br /> <br />Mr. Watson stated he is concerned about the topography, as it drops right down. He is not sure <br />how the developer will handle, as they have agreed it will be difficult, but he would be concerned <br />about ponding taking place on existing yards. <br /> <br />Mr. Harrison indicated the property on the southwest corner will have a storm sewer running to <br />the street, which will allow drainage in that area. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked if it will fully mitigate the area. <br /> <br />Mr. Harrison stated with a heavy storm, you could have some build up in places, but it will <br />ultimately run to the pond and into the lake. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked for clarification that water from this development would stay in this <br />development. <br /> <br />Mr. Harrison stated that was correct, and they are adjusting the grades to ensure that happens. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/February 6, 2003 <br /> Page 15 of 26 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.