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
Private streets through the association-maintained cottages. Principal Planner <br />Trudgeon demonstrated how the long private street would split off to one-way <br />streets, with greenspace inside. He indicated the street was 24 feet at minimum, with <br />no on-street parking. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson asked if the City Council wanted the road taken further north. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon indicated they wanted the private road for additional greenspace. He <br />stated the layout on page 37 showed a public road at a narrower width, but Staff was not <br />comfortable with that, so the developer went with a private road. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon noted that the PUD ordinance requires that the development have <br />either 20 percent public open space and/or 50 percent private and open space. He advised that <br />the Park Commission did not recommend the provision of public open space within the <br />development, mostly due to the existence of a planned park at the corner of the Sunwood Drive <br />and Sunfish Lake Boulevard. He stated that Staff is requesting that the development have at least <br />50 percent private open and green space, and currently the development shows 64 percent open <br />and green space. Principal Planner Trudgeon explained that as part of the PUD process, the <br />applicant is required to submit a preliminary site plan and architectural elevations. He stated that <br />typically, multi-family developments require site plan review. However since the plat is <br />comprised of single-family units and detached townhomes a site plan is not required, therefore <br />Staff will be using the PUD process to conduct a site plan review. He indicated that in general, <br />the site plan is dependent on what is allowed as part of the PUD and what is shown on the <br />preliminary plat. He stated that the landscaping plan, as shown, is deficient in the number of <br />plantings required under the ordinance, and Staff will be working with the developer to correct <br />this. He stated the architectural elevations of the units that will be used in the development are at <br />a minimum of 1,545 square feet in size, which exceeds the requirements under the ordinance. He <br />indicated the exterior materials will be of vinyl siding and asphalt shingling on the roof. He <br />noted that the proposed units will have front porches. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon explained that Staff had concerns with the road widths, from a safety <br />perspective. He stated that City Engineering, Public Works, Police Department and Fire <br />Department Staff expressed concerns about the use of narrower roads than typically is required in <br />Ramsey residential subdivisions. He indicated they felt that the narrower roads do not provide <br />for efficient movement of vehicles, which leads to operational concerns regarding snow plowing <br />and the provision of public safety services, and would create a precedent for narrower roads in <br />other residential developments within Ramsey. Principal Planner Trudgeon indicated that a <br />group of Staff had gone to Stillwater to view Liberty on the Lake, and had a fire truck drive the <br />roads, however Staff felt they had not had time to sort through the trip and determine their views <br />on the use of narrow roads such as these. He stated that Staff thinks they may have some ideas, <br />but it leaves the Planning Commission in a tough situation tonight, as Staff cannot make a solid <br />recommendation. He indicated there were representatives here tonight from the other City <br />departments in case the Commission has any questions. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/February 6, 2003 <br /> Page 8 of 26 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.