My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 07/06/2017
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2017
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 07/06/2017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:28:38 AM
Creation date
12/27/2017 4:29:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
07/06/2017
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.
/
495
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
Preliminary Tree Preservation and Landscape Plan: <br />• Add symbol for the culvert to the legend. <br />• Minimum culvert size permitted is fifteen (15) inches in diameter. <br />• Add planting table that indicates quantities, size, and root stock of proposed trees. Note that <br />deciduous trees shall have a caliper of no less than one (1) inch. <br />• Add table to plan sheet that includes species, tag #, diameter, condition, status (removed/preserved) <br />and a total tally of significant tree DBH inches, total tally of inches removed, and total tally of <br />inches preserved. <br />General Information <br />The project site is located in the R-1 Residential (MUSA) zoning district, as well as the Mississippi River <br />Critical Corridor Area (MRCCA) Overlay District. The MN DNR just recently completed a rulemaking <br />process that amended various standards in the MRRCA. However, they have yet to provide the necessary <br />guidance to municipalities as to how to proceed with updating local Zoning Codes. Until that guidance is <br />received, municipalities are `stuck' with outdated MRCCA standards. Staff has had discussions with the <br />MN DNR and they have indicated that a Planned Unit Development (PUD) would be an acceptable zoning <br />tool to utilize to address deviations from the current MRCCA standards as they appear to actually comply <br />with the new MRRCA standards. <br />The project proposes to subdivide the land into twelve (12) residential lots and three (3) outlots. However, <br />existing homes at 14821 Bowers Drive NW and 8846 Highway 10 NW will need to be platted as individual <br />lots rather than included in Outlot B as outlots shall not contain any structures nor are they considered to <br />be buildable lots until such time that that land is re -platted. <br />Comprehensive Plan <br />The development site is guided as Low Density Residential in the Comprehensive Plan. The <br />Comprehensive Plan defines Low Density Residential as areas that are within the MUSA and would average <br />three (3) units per acre. The development site is within the MUSA and the proposed average density will <br />be 1.3 units per acre [Zoning Code allows for up to 3 units per acre]. <br />The Low Density Residential designation requires that urban services be available for development. <br />However, the entire Bower's Drive neighborhood, while also guided as Low Density Residential, is served <br />by private septic systems and individual wells. The Sketch Plan and now the Preliminary Plat proposes <br />that the twelve (12) new lots also be served by private services. The proposal also indicates there will be a <br />request for a Zoning Amendment to process this development as a Planned Unit Development. That <br />designation, if approved by City Council, would allow for certain deviations from the underlying Zoning <br />District standards, including the use of private utilities, with a defined public benefit. <br />The submittal again includes a fifty (50) foot wide outlot behind the existing lots on the north side of Bowers <br />Drive that would serve as a buffer from future development of the agricultural land. This was a result of <br />comments received from the neighborhood during multiple workshops last year and is being proposed as <br />that public benefit. However, it is not clear is who will ultimately own Outlot A. Please provide <br />clarification as to the ultimate owner of this outlot. <br />it is our mission to work together to responsibly grow our community, and to provide quality, cost-effective and efficient government services. <br />Page 2 of5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.