Laserfiche WebLink
be interest in that mix. He stated that from the comments tonight, it is clear that there is not support <br />for a mix of lots sizes. <br /> <br />Commissioner Woestehoff asked the developer if they are going to entertain a development with <br />80-foot-wide lots on the site. <br /> <br />Mr. Schmidt stated that he is unsure if they will attempt to proceed with 80-foot-wide lots on the <br />site as he is unsure that they would gain the velocity in Ramsey with larger, more expensive lots <br />in Ramsey. <br /> <br />Commissioner Woestehoff stated that one of his concerns is that there are probably few developers <br />that would take on a project this size with 80 foot lots and therefore the potential would be that the <br />parcel could be split into two and developed by different developers. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson stated that Brookfield has 80-foot lots or larger and sold quickly and was <br />unsure why there would be any issues. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that Brookfield started in 2005 and had eight <br />subdivisions over ten to 15 years with more than one developer. He stated that another example <br />would be Woodlands, which continues to sell but not at the same pace as Riverstone. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl stated that staff has heard from the developer and property owner <br />have stated that 65 foot lots are becoming more popular in the market. She stated that for <br />Brookfield, the 80 foot lots were created because that is what was popular at the time. She <br />displayed the potential compromise from the developer and property owner that show the 65 foot <br />lots in the middle and the larger lots on the exterior of the development. <br /> <br />Chairperson Bauer invited members of the public to provide input. <br /> <br />Lee Packer, relative of the property owner, stated that it seems the City has made its decision. He <br />stated that he was hoping that there would be some room for negotiations. He stated that while at <br />one time the property was successful for farming, it no longer is. He stated that his aunt and uncle, <br />the property owners, are aging and would like to move on and sell the land. He stated that it has <br />been their desire to sell the land for some time and his family was willing to donate land for a <br />larger community park. He stated that he understands that there have been resident comments in <br />opposition but noted that there was some misinformation related to the original petition. He stated <br />that their goal is to have something developed that would be of value to the City and the residents <br />that would live in the new homes. He reviewed language found within the Maxwell Study the City <br />previously commissioned that mentioned formation of a task force to provide direction on the Trott <br />Brook North area. He asked the City to reconsider the plan and work with the developer to <br />compromise on a plan for the property. He referenced the barns on the property which were <br />mentioned to possibly be included in the park and noted that the barns will continue to deteriorate <br />over time and if this development proposal does not move forward, he is unsure when the next <br />interested party will come. <br /> <br /> <br />Planning Commission Worksession / July 9, 2020 <br />Page 3 of 6 <br /> <br />