Agenda - Council - 02/23/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF RIVER'S BEND 3RD ADDITION; CASE OF ELIZABETH RAUDIO AND RICK FOSTER By: Zoning Administrator Sylvia Frolik zq Background: The preliminary plat proposal for River's Bend 3rd Addition reviewed in 1991 consisted of 5 commercial lots, 27 single family lots and multi-family units. The multi-family proposal met with opposition from neighboring property owners and also conflicted with Scenic River regulations; the preliminary plat was not presented to City Council for approval. On January 19, 1993, the applicants submitted a proposal for a revised preliminary plat of River's Bend 3rd Addition. The plat now proposes 8 commercial lots and 32 single family lots; the previous proposal for multi- family units has been eliminated. The following items are enclosed for your information: a) b) c) d) Site location map Preliminary plat Letter from Mn/DOT dated October 1, 1991 City Staff review letter dated January 26, 1993 Observations: The property is presently zoned B-1 Business and the applicants do have a rezoning application on line to rezone the plat to allow for the single family development. With respect to park dedication, there is an agreement between the City of Ramsey and Ramsey Center Parmership dated January 10, 1980 that exempts this particular property from any park dedication in lieu of property donated to the City and County for various purposes. The average size of the single family lots is 13,000+ square feet; the minimum area requirement under Scenic River regulations is 12,150 square feet. All lots contain the minimum width requirement at the building setback line. The developer has proposed Xkimo Street with a 60 foot fight-of-way. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that Xkimo be platted with a 66 foot right-of-way and City Staff recommends 80 feet of right-of-way. Because of the commercial nature of the land use west of Xkimo Street, it would seem advisable to construct the street with a minimum 42 foot street width. This will provide an additional 10 foot lane for turning movements into businesses, and to accommodate bicycle traffic directed through the plat from the planned trail system. Additionally, Staff feels a provision for a sidewalk should also be considered as a means for separating pedestrians from both bicycle and vehicle traffic. A~66 foot, fight-of-way would only allow for a 4.5 to 5~5 .foot terrace between the sidewalk and the curb. This terrace width is marginally "acceptable for accommodating boulevard trees, and would be ~~nat_e_for accommodating snow storage for a commercial width street wilh~f encroaShing onto the sidewalk. Staff feels the larger fight-of-way width is preferable, particularly in light of the eventual sidewalk need. The wider fight-of-way would also serve to provide between the commer~ and resJdenfi~figal land uses on opposite sides of the street.