My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 02/04/2021
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2021
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 02/04/2021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 10:46:33 AM
Creation date
4/15/2021 12:03:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
02/04/2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
and therefore the silos are a necessary part of the business. He stated that the intent would be to <br />have a screening wall and landscaping along the southern border. He stated that if the building to <br />east were not constructed at the same time, they would construct a large berm with trees to provide <br />additional screening until the second building is constructed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Gengler stated that she is also fine with the outdoor storage and agreed that fencing <br />or screening would be great. She asked for clarification on what a wing wall would be. She <br />referenced proposed building B, understanding that would be a second component or expansion, <br />and asked if the backs of the buildings would face each other and where the access would be for <br />building B. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl stated that she does not have an example for a wing wall but <br />described it as a wall attached to the existing building. <br /> <br />Mr. Moore provided additional explanation on where the different entrances would be for the <br />buildings along with the truck court for the buildings. <br /> <br />Commissioner Peters asked if there would be any sound coming from the silos that would impact <br />the residential properties. <br /> <br />Mr. Moore commented that he did not know the exact details. He commented that there would <br />probably be some level of noise but would meet the requirements of City Code similar to other <br />businesses. He believed that the distance from residential would mitigate any potential noise <br />concerns. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff asked if the intent would mainly be intended to have single occupancy <br />in both buildings. <br /> <br />Mr. Moore replied that under this concept building A would be single occupancy as it is a custom <br />design for that user. He stated that building B would be dependent upon the market demand. <br /> <br />Commissioner VanScoy stated that he appreciates the attitude of the applicant and their willingness <br />to work with the City and address any concerns. He stated that he looks forward to this project <br />moving forward. <br /> <br />Mr. Moore commented that Ramsey has a well-trained staff that has helped them through this <br />process. He stated that they are looking forward to moving forward and hoped that this would <br />work for all the parties. <br /> <br />Chairperson Bauer commented that he would drive past this site multiple times per day and <br />thanked the applicant for proposing a good-looking product. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl stated that she believes that the City has an easement for the trail <br />corridor, or an easement could be obtained, as the goal is to have a trail corridor in that location. <br />She asked if the applicant prefers the two-building concept. <br /> <br /> <br />Planning Commission/ February 4, 2021 <br />Page 9 of 11 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.