My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 11/09/2004
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2004
>
Agenda - Council - 11/09/2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/24/2025 2:34:07 PM
Creation date
11/5/2004 2:20:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
11/09/2004
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.
/
422
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
October 6, 2004; the WMO engineer will need to review these revised plans to ensure they <br />comply with WMO permit approval. <br />Associate Planner Geisler indicated Outlot A of Regency Pond is proposed to be.replatted as Lot <br />1, Block 1 and Outlot A, Regency Pond 4tn Addition. The lot exceeds the one -acre minimum lot <br />size requirement and the 200-foot lot width requirement. The grading, drainage, and utility plans <br />are being reviewed as part of the CNP Storage site plan. All drainage ponds shown on the site <br />must be dedicated as drainage and utility easements on the final plat. Engineering staff is also <br />recommending a full cul-de-sac be provided for 148rn Avenue, which is regularly required for <br />stub streets in new developments throughout the City. The plat rs ;proposing to gain access <br />through a private access off of Ramsey Boulevard Staff hed wras receivitten comments from <br />Anoka County that indicate this access is accepta� I One of h' conditions of Anoka County's <br />approval is that the corner property also utiliz W. acre s should k redevelop in the future. <br />The preliminary plat shows an outlot at this Ion, an additional legal agreement will need to <br />� <br />be drafted to guarantee access to this corner property <br />Associate Planner Geisler advised the Planning Comission recommended approval of the <br />proposcd site plan contingent on approval of the subdivision request, and that the request for <br />preliminary plat be approved with the followrngje-ont itions: <br />■ Approval of the request for site planyGNP Storage <br />■ Access to line up with 147tn Aveti11'& - T&wr nter Gardens on the west side of Ramsey <br />Boulevard„ s to <br />■ The minimum cul-de-sac lengtIfAnedcssat r asf determr�ed y staff as the terminus of 148 <br />Avenue -' <br />Associate Planner Geisler indicatea'staff recomend deniiT of the site plan until the <br />deficiencies are resolved Gfyen t se lack of a full culde sac on 1481n Avenue, combined with <br />grading, drainage, and landscaprngtdef ciencies associated with the site plan, staff is <br />recommending that the request fog rdmnary plat approval be denied. <br />Arm �x. <br />3 X <br />Steve Schmidi,.222 Monroe Street ink o TSM Development, stated -when Regency Ponds <br />was platted Oakwood Development hap chased all the land from Wayne Johnson and he <br />acquired this land from him He was here seven years ago proposing townhomes, which the <br />neighbors did not want. TheCity changed the zoning and this current use complies. Originally <br />148rn` Avenue was to go throug iRamsey Boulevard, now with the layout from the access and <br />Town Center, the county does, not like that proximity. When this was reviewed with the <br />Planning Commission it was, clear that the county would not allow that access. He talked to two <br />county commissioners and the proposed access has been agreed to. He said he would create an <br />outlot that could be acquired' so there would be access for the adjacent property when it is <br />developed. He stated the Planning Commission felt this plat could be worked out with a minor <br />cul-de-sac, and he is now being told he has to give a full cul-de-sac. This would take away a <br />minimum of 18 units from him. He stated when this was discussed the code allowed a chain link <br />fence. 1-le agreed he would be willing to put up a privacy fence, but he does not see a need for <br />the privacy fence as well as a buffer of shrubs inside the fence. He stated if there was going to be <br />a cul-de-sac required there would have been an easement granted a long time ago to take this <br />City Council/October 12, 2004 <br />Page 17 of 29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.