My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/05/2014
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2014
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/05/2014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:21:05 AM
Creation date
7/9/2014 12:31:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
06/05/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
194
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
Regular Planning Commission <br />Meeting Date: 06/05/2014 <br />By: Tim Gladhill, Community Development <br />5. 4. <br />Information <br />Title: <br />PUBLIC HEARING: Review Preliminary Plat of Country Club Hills Located East of Variolite Street, South of <br />161st Avenue; Case of Greatland Homes, LLC <br />Purpose/Background: <br />The City has received an Application for Preliminary Plat Approval of Country Club Hills. Country Club Hills is a <br />proposed major subdivision that would create 88 new single family lots. These lots were previously contemplated as <br />Phases II and III of Sweetbay Ridge and were included in the original Preliminary Plat approval. <br />Notification: <br />Staff attempted to notify all Property Owners within a 700 foot radius of the Property of the Public Hearing via <br />Standard US Mail. The Public Hearing was also published in the City's official newsletter, the Anoka County <br />UnionHerald. <br />Observations/Alternatives: <br />Detailed analysis can be found in the attached Technical Review Report. The following is a summary of Staff <br />findings. <br />Generally speaking, it appears that the proposed subdivision complies with required bulk standards such as lot size, <br />lot width, and required public improvements. The Preliminary Plat also appears to demonstrate that future dwellings <br />will be able to comply with other standards such as setbacks, maximum coverage, etc. <br />Based on experience from the first phase of Sweetbay Ridge, Staff would recommend that the Applicant supply <br />more detailed floor plan information on a select few lots contained in the Preliminary Plat. The Property contains <br />significant wetland complexes. Staff desires that the Applicant demonstrate in additional detail that there is <br />sufficient net buildable area such that a floor plan consistent with the type of homes being constructed in the <br />development can be accommodated. On at least one occasion in Sweetbay Ridge Phase I, this proved to be difficult <br />once the actual floor plan was known. Additionally, Staff is requesting that the delineated boundary of the wetlands <br />be clearly marked (temporary markings such as snow fence or something similar) until construction on individual <br />lots, including final landscape improvements (topsoil/sod), are complete. Often times, a builder or home owner that <br />is installing these final improvements are not aware of this boundary and thus, the temporary markings should will <br />assist in ensuring that no filling of or encroachment into the wetland area(s) occurs in violation of the state's <br />Wetland Conservation Act. Although these standards are addressed in State Statute and State Rules, the City, <br />through the Lower Rum River Water Management Organization, is responsible for enforcing them. <br />The current plans do not show a connection to Traprock Commons, the existing development to the south, via <br />Traprock Street. The City Council explicitly did not require this connection as part of the original Sweetbay Ridge <br />plat, based on significant public feedback. Staff would desire that the Planning Commission explicitly discuss this <br />item to either confirm that the City will not require this connection, or to direct Staff to explore this opportunity <br />further if so desired. Staff is not recommending that this connection shall be made, but desires to ensure that the <br />assumption is properly discussed. It is anticipated that a number of the residents of Traprock Commons will remain <br />opposed to the connection, and Country Club Hills can operate at an acceptable level without this connection. Staff <br />would recommend retaining a corridor for future utility, trail, or emergency access if necessary. <br />Civil Engineering Plans (grading, drainage, utility, erosion control) are generally acceptable with revisions as <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.