My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 03/30/2015 - Special
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Environmental Policy Board
>
2015
>
Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 03/30/2015 - Special
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/18/2025 2:14:48 PM
Creation date
5/22/2015 11:24:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Environmental Policy Board
Document Title
Special
Document Date
03/30/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Chairperson Stodola asked if there is enough parking. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill stated that the type of floor plan and income levels <br /> were considered. This project would likely be more one car households so it would meet the <br /> minimum of one stall per unit. <br /> City Planner Anderson stated that there is visitor parking a half a block away that is not <br /> overnight parking for guests. <br /> Board Member Lewis commented that this plan was well thought out and robust and that he was <br /> impressed. He doesn't have a problem with it and felt that it was more innovative and detailed <br /> than the previous proposal. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill stated that this project did receive $580,000 in <br /> funding from the Metropolitan Council. <br /> Board Member Lewis stated that this is the kind of project and plan that should be looked at for <br /> the Eco-Star Award. <br /> City Council Liaison LeTourneau spoke to the Staff regarding the contrast between the two cases <br /> and how the Board is appreciative of a complete picture. He asked how likely is it that the Board <br /> can ask developers to provide more complete plans in the future. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill stated that this is something the Staff strives to <br /> achieve. He spoke about project deadlines and said that historically the City has tried to give <br /> some contingent recommendations and revisit them. If the Board feels that the information in <br /> the last case was not enough, then Staff should know and then they can go back to the developer. <br /> He stated that if it is the Board's wish to have the kind of detail found in this project, Staff will <br /> make sure they provide it without delaying projects. Staff can work with code to provide the <br /> desired level of detail. <br /> Board Member Valentine would like to support the Staff. He talked about the huge contrast <br /> between the cases. He felt that the Parkview East case was close to the line of not having <br /> complete plans. He would like to support the Staff to be able to go back to developers to get <br /> more fully developed plans. <br /> City Council Liaison LeTourneau stated that he doesn't think it is the Board's intention to push <br /> developers away by setting too high a standard. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill stated that the Parkview East case warrants pursuing <br /> additional details and that the City can commit to a smooth process if they are provided with <br /> detail. <br /> Chairperson Stodala asked about the timeframe of the projects. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill replied that the City tries to provide approval 45 <br /> days from the date the application is received. Some cases do take longer depending on <br /> complexity. <br /> Environmental Policy Board/March 30, 2015 <br /> Page 7 of 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.