My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 06/02/2016
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2016
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 06/02/2016
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 3:20:29 PM
Creation date
8/10/2016 3:20:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
06/02/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
elevation of the structure in relation to OHW. Comments received from the Environmental <br />Policy Board and the DNR were reviewed. She explained staff recommended approval of the <br />front yard variance setback, and allowing a second driveway on the property located at 14301 <br />Neon St NW, contingent upon the Applicant providing an updated survey confirming that the <br />proposed location is outside the Shore Impact Zone as well as the assumed elevation differences <br />noted in the case, subject to survey and elevation. <br />Citizen Input <br />Chair Stevenson believed the request met the three considerations for a variance. He stated this <br />was a very odd shaped lot. He requested comment from the other commissions on their thoughts. <br />Commissioner Bauer asked who would own the private drive. <br />Community Development Intern Meyers reported the private drive would be collectively owned <br />by those that are serviced by the drive. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill reported the driveway would have a cross access <br />easement. <br />Greg Binfet, 14301 Neon Street, reported he purchased his home three years ago. He understood <br />that he would have access to the driveway, along with the other properties and that the driveway <br />had to be maintained privately. <br />Commissioner Bauer requested further information on the ordinary high water line. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill stated the engineering department reviewed this <br />request but did not put note flood information on the elevations. <br />Commissioner Bauer was not concerned with the request and was glad to see the old oaks would <br />be reserved. <br />Commissioner Andrusko questioned what the recommendation from the Environmental Policy <br />Board (EPB) was. <br />Community Development Intern discussed the recommendation of the EPB in further detail <br />noting the group recommended the applicant complete another survey. <br />Further discussion ensued regarding the ordinary high water line. <br />Commissioner VanScoy asked why the building had been turned 90 degrees. <br />Mr. Binfet discussed the original plan noting the change was made to hide the garage in a <br />wooded area and would save three very old oak trees. In addition, the proposed location would <br />Planning Commission/June 2, 2016 <br />Page 3 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.