10/02/78 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

P& Z-1- 5/1/78 PLANNING & ZONING City of Ramsey County of Anoka State of Minnesota A regular meeting of the Ramsey City Planning & Zoning Commission was held on May l, 1978 at Ramsey City Hall, 15153 Nowthen Boulevard. Meeting was called to order by Chairman Ken Peterson at 7:30 p.m. with the following in attendance: Kenneth Peterson A1 Sorteberg Kathy Schneider Ronald West Bradley Bodle Art Dunn Also Present: Peter Raatikka, City Eng. Item 1. Public Hearing - Traorock~ Commons. Chairman Ken Peterson started the Hearing by explaining the reasons for a Public Hearing and asked for any citizen input. Mr. Delano Skiem was present to explain the restrictive, covenants and e×- plained that since it his intentions to locate within the plat, these covenants should keep the plat aesthetically attractive. Linda Andrus, 15520 VarioliteN.W. asked if the accessory buildings would be located along the rear of the lots, and if so, this wou%~d not make a very attractive view along Variolite Street. Ivan Fields, 7605 156th N.W. asked about the minimum acreage requirement for horses and e×plained that he was concerned with horse odOr'-and the idea of horses in the park area. Mr. Fields also asked about construction litter and Mr. Skiem stated that any complaints should be directed to him personally. Linda Andrus inquired what plans were being made for the park, and M~. Skiem e×olained that this would be a City responsibility. Ken Peterson asked for additional questions and explained that any input or questions regarding the park land could be directed to the Parks & Rec. Co~missio~ as he was sure they would appreciate any citizen input. Public Hearing closed. 7:50p.m. ]fen Peterson asked Pete Raatikka to go over his report. In response to the 700 foot dead end question #2, a cul-de-sac would be provided. The resubdivision plan was brought un for discussion. In~-regard~to~.the easement along Lot l, Block l, Del Skiem felt enough easements had been given already. The consensus of the Commission was that in the event of resubdivision, an easement could be given by the present owner at that time. Pete Raatikka pointed out several areas where the resubdivision plan needed reworking. Del Skiem e×plained that the whole concept of resubdivision is a "what if" game, but that the plan could be redrav~n. In discussing the park land being dedicated, Mr. Skiem stated that the Park Commission already agreed to accept the land in lieu of money even though the land was only 5 acres instead of 8% or 6.42 acres as required by ordinance. Kathy Schneider pointed out that due to the fact the land had been reduced down to 4.33 acres, the Park Commission should have an opportunity to tee×amine the offer. Kathy Schneider explained to Mr. Skiem that in other cases that the land did not 'meet the ordinance re- quirements, developers offered cash along with the land to make up the difference. Mr. Skiem did not seem to feel this should be necessary, but it was agreed'by the Commission members that an agreement on this should