My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 06/05/2001
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2001
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 06/05/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/20/2025 2:09:11 PM
Creation date
5/14/2003 8:54:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
06/05/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
Chairperson Nixt inquired if there will be substantial ability to preserve trees on peninsula and <br />trail corridor, but as they move towards the center there will be substantial tree removal. <br /> <br />Mr. Black replied yes. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson stated that on the peninsula Mr. Black has indicated that they will show <br />total tree preservation, but will the City have some control over tree removal when someone <br />purchases the property. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik replied that the City can do tree preservation on a lot <br />by lot basis with the developer, but once someone owns the property they have very little control. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt inquired if it would be possible to include something in the PUD. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik replied yes. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt inquired if the developer was far enough along with the grading analysis to <br />know for sure that they can extend City services without substantially changing topography <br />along the peninsula. <br /> <br />Mr. Black replied yes. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt requested that staff draft a document guarantying tree preservation as part of <br />the PUD. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sweet stated that she understands that an impact statement is not required, but <br />was not sure as to why an environmental assessment is not required. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon stated that an environmental assessment on a residential subdivisions <br />to be completed in the metro area is required if there is more than 250 single family homes or <br />275 multi family homes. If it is a mixed use development, they have to meet a score of 1 or less <br />and this development rates at a .91, so it is not required. But the residents could petition that one <br />be completed. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Chairperson Nixt, to recommend that City <br />Council approve the preliminary plat subject to the City staff review letter dated June 1, 2001 <br />and contingent upon control over tree preservation, dealing with drainage and neighboring <br />properties, exploring the environmental issue, ongoing dialog with property owners and staff <br />across from the "dog house" lot, and an approved PUD rezoning. <br /> <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Johnson, Kociscak, Reeve, <br />Sweet, and Watson. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/June 5, 2001 <br /> Page 17 of 28 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.