My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 09/24/2002
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
2002
>
Minutes - Council - 09/24/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 12:09:32 PM
Creation date
5/6/2003 2:11:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
09/24/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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
Case #9: <br /> <br />Request for Final Plat Approval of Echo Ridge Second Addition: Case of <br />Robert Longfield <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon stated that Robert Longfield is requesting sketch plan approval to <br />create a new lot from his existing 10-acre parcel located on 177t~' Avenue. The applicant is <br />requesting to create a new 2.08-acre parcel and keep the existing homestead on 7.9 acres. The <br />applicant initially applied for a variance to the minimum lot size of 2.5 acres and was denied by <br />the Board of Adjustment on July 11, 2002. The applicant appealed the denial and the City <br />Council approved the variance to lot size at their July 23, 2002 meeting. Mr. Longfield currently <br />owns a 10-acre parcel that receives access from 177th Avenue. The minor subdivision as <br />proposed, was not in conformance with the required minimum lot size of 2.5 acres. However, <br />the applicant has received a variance to create Lot 1, Block 1 as shown on the sketch plan. City <br />Ordinances require that newly created and existing lots have 200 feet of frontage on a public <br />road. Staff initially had concern that Lot 2, Block 1 (the existing homestead) would be deficient <br />in meeting the lot width requirement. However, after reviewing City Ordinances, it was <br />determined that Lot 2, Block 1 will meet the lot width requirement as defined in City <br />Ordinances. City Ordinances also require that the arrangement of streets in new subdivisions <br />shall make provisions for the continuation of existing and future streets into adjoining areas. The <br />proposed minor subdivision does not show the continuation of the existing 177th Avenue right- <br />of-way to the eastern border of the applicant's property. Mr. Longfield has objected to <br />dedicating this right-of-way at this time. Staff has had a series of meetings with the applicant <br />and from those discussions, staff is proposing that no fight-of-way be dedicated at this time. <br />However, language will be inserted into the development agreement that will require Mr. <br />Longfield to dedicate the right-of-way at the time that Lot 2 is resubdivided. Since there is no <br />need for the City to own and maintain a fight-of-way corridor until lots are created that will need <br />the access, staff feels that this may be an acceptable solution. The Planning Commission <br />reviewed the sketch plan at their September 5, 2002 meeting, and recommended approval subject <br />to compliance with City Staff Review Letter and language being included in the development <br />agreement that will require the Longfields to dedicate street right-of-way at the time Lot 2, Block <br />1 is subdivided. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman inquired if the road was built up to Lot 2. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon reviewed where the road is currently constructed. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Kurak, seconded by Councilmember Hendriksen, to approve the final <br />plat contingent upon compliance with the City staff review letter dated September 19, 2002, and <br />the developer entering into a development agreement with the City. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Councilmember Hendriksen inquired if the language in the development <br />agreement pertaining to future road right of way met the City Attorney's approval. City Attorney <br />Goodrich replied yes. Councilmember Kurak inquired if Mr. Longfeld is no longer the owner of <br /> <br />City Council/September 24, 2002 <br /> Page 30 of 33 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.