My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2017
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2017
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:27:24 AM
Creation date
3/14/2017 1:32:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
02/02/2017
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
382
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
(2) Staff Feedback <br />• Staff did not spent a significant amount of time reviewing these options. Generally, yes, these sites would <br />work form a physical site layout perspective. <br />• These are nice sites (from a development readiness perspective). They include internal roadways, <br />utilities, mass grading, have been platted, external arterial infrastructure in place, etc. <br />• Locating Stone Brook on these sites would make for a much easier/cleaner discussion for the City (from a <br />real estate development perspective/ master developer perspective). These sites would generally allow <br />for this type of use (from a zoning perspective). <br />• Staff would like to note —there are three potential issues with this site location for Stone Brook: <br />o Stone Brook only needs 0.9 - 1.0 acres of land. Wasted land (or remnant lots) would result from <br />development of Stone Brook on these pre -determined sized sites. Could range from about .25 <br />acre to .45 acre of wasted land or 25%-35% (depending on the site/ size of Stone Brook). <br />Because of the pre -determined/ pre -platted lots —it would be challenging to reconfigure lots <br />today. This would also result in a missed opportunity for tax base. <br />o These sites are considered premium sties, listed at premium prices ($12 per square foot). These <br />are arguably the only pad ready sites in The COR (most other sites will result in various policy/ <br />development issues). Staff believes the City has the ability to capture more dollars in land <br />proceeds on these sites (in comparison to what Stone Brook is offering—$3.00 psf). Selling these <br />properties at $3.00 psf (or close to) —it would likely trigger a business subsidy process/ request — <br />which Stone Brook is trying to avoid. <br />o The policy question of "fit" does surface with this particular site location. Does a children's <br />academy fit here (from a master developer perspective)? Or, was this area visioned for more <br />traditional retail/ restaurants? If the City does move forward with recommending this site <br />location, staff believes this question may need to be discussed. Why does the City think this <br />project "fits' here? <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.