My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 07/14/2020
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2020
>
Agenda - Council - 07/14/2020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 1:51:28 PM
Creation date
7/20/2020 9:42:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
07/14/2020
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.
/
321
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
be development at some point and therefore is not struggling as much as some residents may. He <br />stated that across the neighborhood people are resistant of change but accepting that this is going <br />to happen and are working collaboratively through this process. He stated that everyone loves the <br />tree canopy and would like that characteristic to remain. He stated that the neighborhood has <br />embraced the 12 homes that Capstone brought through the last development. He stated that the <br />existing residents would like the characteristic to remain to the extent possible. He stated that <br />related to the second access, the general consensus is that if the second access has to be there, they <br />would accept it, but no one really wants it. He stated that the overwhelming resistance is against <br />a full access road as they would like Bowers Drive to remain secluded. He stated that the two <br />versions presented today seem to be acceptable. He stated that the most favorable orientation for <br />Riverdale Drive would be to have the eastern most option. He stated that the residents do not want <br />Riverdale Drive to come into Bowers Drive and change addresses. He appreciated Mr. Guck's <br />comments related to tree preservation. He noted that 30 years ago that forest looked much different <br />and continued to change. He commented that the inventory that was completed yielded some great <br />information with very old growth trees that are a valuable amenity for the community. He stated <br />that he would like to see as much of the tree canopy protected as possible, beyond a one -acre park. <br />Councilmember Specht stated that this is a beautiful area of Ramsey and wants people to be able <br />to enjoy that in a way that respects the residents and the forested area there. He agreed that the <br />forest should be preserved to the extent possible and believed a play area would also be nice. <br />Councilmember Heinrich stated that she supports the higher density being located near the solar <br />farm as that is not the most desirable view. She stated that she supports the full connection, <br />although she understands the sensitivities to the residents. She commented that public safety is <br />the most important to her. She stated that if the City is going to ask the developer to preserve more <br />trees, would the City then still ask them to build a park. She stated that she would lean towards <br />leaving it as a natural area. She referenced the plan which has a change to the Highway 10 access <br />point and asked if there is concern with the right-in/right-out option if the full connection is <br />provided on the other end. <br />Police Captain Frankfurth stated that there would be some concerns with a right-in/right-out option <br />depending where it is on Highway 10. He stated that they would at least want a right in for public <br />safety. <br />City Engineer Westby commented that any time you can remove a median crossover would be a <br />good thing and would be supported by MnDOT. He stated that a right-in/right-out typically does <br />not prove to be a safety issue if there are not accesses in close proximity. <br />Councilmember Riley stated that he favors larger lots, especially around the edge of existing <br />homes. He commented that this would seem to be a good fit for smaller lots as well. He stated <br />that in terms of street connection, a full street connection is preferable. He stated that whenever <br />there is a discussion related to long cul-de-sacs, Bowers Drive is always mentioned. He stated that <br />creating the second access would be an important connection and did not believe it would open up <br />Bowers Drive as a cut through for the new neighborhood. He stated that there is already a 75-foot <br />buffer discussed, which is larger than many of the lots that would be created. He stated that he is <br />supportive of the direction that this is moving. <br />City Council / June 23, 2020 <br />Page 17 of 21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.