Laserfiche WebLink
Case #3 <br /> <br />Request !for Sketch <br />Feldman and Riverside com. <br /> <br />~plan Review <br /> ~anies <br /> <br />of Ramsey Office Park; Case of Steven <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald stated the citY received a sketch plan application from Steven Feldman <br />and Riverside Companies to subdivid~ OuflOt A, Rivers Bend 3rd Addition. She indicated the <br />subject property is located southl 'of i43rd!Avenue, east of Trunk Highway #47, and west of <br />Xkimo Street. ~ <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald advised the sketch plan is proposing to subdivide the subject property <br />into one buildable lot and one oUtl0t, iShe stated Mr. Feldman submitted a site plan application <br />for the development of a 12,000 square foot office facility on the proposed Lot 1. She indicated <br />the newly created lot exceeds the ~ acre minimUm lot size, 100-foot lot width, and 150 foot lot <br />depth requirements. She stated the standard drainage and utility easements will need to be <br />provided along the perimeter of the neTM lot. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald indicated-that access will be derived from Xkimo Street. She noted the <br />site plan is not proposing to gain any access from Trunk Highway #47, therefore right of access <br />along Trunk Highway #47 should!be.dedicated to the State. She stated the City's master Park <br />and Trail Map shows a pedestrian trail along Highway #47 from Xkimo Street where the trail <br />terminates on the Holiday Station Property,! extending to 142nd Avenue. She indicated Staff is <br />working with the developer to address the ~appropriate location of the trail due to topography <br />constraints along the Highway #47 Corridor. <br /> <br />Commission Input <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked if there was a variance included as part of this site plan. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald indicatedlthere is because the lot is part of the Scenic River Overlay <br />Area. : <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked how Staff believes .that the developer is not creating the need for the <br />variance by the size of the lots. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald i.ndicated that almost any configuration would require a variance. She <br />stated because of how the parce[ hys:out, lthere are few options. She stated Staff has had <br />conversations with the DNR, which she Will discuss in more detail during the site plan review. <br /> <br />Motion by Chairperson tqixt, seconded by Commissioner Brauer approve the sketch plan <br />contingent on compliance :with the Staff Review Letter and site plan approval, <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: ChairPerson Nixt, Commissioners Brauer, Jeffrey, Shepherd and <br />Van Scoy. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioners Johnson, and Watson. <br /> <br />Planning CommiSsion/December <br /> Page :8 of 119 <br /> <br />2, 2004 <br /> <br /> <br />