My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/04/2020
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2020
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/04/2020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 11:05:12 AM
Creation date
6/16/2020 3:25:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
06/04/2020
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
155
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
Commissioner Woestehoff stated that based on the public comment there is concern with the <br />proposed density and asked if the applicant would be willing to explore an option more in line with <br />the current zoning restrictions. <br />Mr. Schmidt replied that staff put together a number of 80-foot lots that could be developed, while <br />they believe additional 80-foot lots could be developed. He stated that they are not attempting to <br />increase density over what is allowed, but simply to provide a variety of housing types. He stated <br />that big lots are less favorable in today's market. He stated that they have heard that people do not <br />care as much about the distance between the side neighbors but prefer to have a larger backyard <br />and therefore they have attempted to provide that situation. He stated that not every person wants <br />a big yard and therefore they attempt to provide a variety of housing types to appeal to different <br />people and families. He stated that the plan was not put forth to create extra density and explained <br />that they believed that the plan met the housing goals of the City and the needs of the community. <br />He confirmed that they welcome input. <br />Commissioner Woestehoff asked for additional details on the variation in housing products and <br />price points. <br />Mr. Schmidt stated that for every one foot of street frontage equates to about $600 in terms of <br />infrastructure and therefore taking out some width helps to reduce the price. He stated that the <br />smaller lot size does not always equate to the less costly option because often empty nesters are <br />choosing those lots and choosing high end options inside. He explained that while the smaller lots <br />often appeal to empty nesters, they can also appeal as more start up housing for families. He <br />reviewed the ranges of pricing from $300,000s to $500,000s. He stated that they see Ramsey as a <br />wonderful community with a lot of City amenities and that can be relatively affordable compared <br />to other areas in the metro where houses cannot be built for under $500,000. <br />Commissioner VanScoy asked if the 55-foot lots would have a homeowners' association. <br />Mr. Schmidt replied that similar to the last case, the homeowners' association would maintain the <br />common space within the entire development and then would also provide yard and snow service <br />to the 55-foot lot homes. <br />Councilmember Musgrove stated that there is a variety of housing in Ramsey and asked staff for <br />input on the market for the different housing types. <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl stated that developers have stated that the villas continue to sell well <br />in Ramsey, but there has also been development of 2.5-acre homes which also sold well. She <br />stated that Ramsey is a desirable place to live. She commented that the middle section lots may <br />have a harder time selling. She stated that the housing study stated that there is a demand for a <br />variety of housing types in Ramsey. She stated that the demand is there but that does not mean <br />that the City needs to allow it. <br />Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that the City has seen requests for the villa product with <br />a few development requests of the larger 2.5 acre lots. He stated that the 80-foot lot developments <br />Planning Commission/ May 7, 2020 <br />Page 9 of 29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.