Agenda - Council - 07/12/2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

15751 Potassium Street NW gamsey, MN 55303 April 6, 2005 Arm: City Planning St. affand Commission Re: Shade Tree Cottages and Rum River Meadows Development Plans As I listen to the red winged blackbirds, ducks, and geese, return to the lands in question this spring t am · driven to strongly request that you deny approval of the preliminary plat for these developments for the following reasons. 1. Residents along the Per,slum access continue to dispute the oWnership of the road, andI am told that they have retained a lawyer in this matter. A resident mated to me that because it was considered a private road, they could not get school bus service or mail delivery up this road, nor could they get a stop sign installed at the end. This is evidenced by the fact that the mailboxes are all at ~e end of the road. Both developments are contingent Upon the use and improvement of this section of Potassium Street being labeled as a public street. Since land-on both sides Of the street is ownedby residents-involved in this dispute it is perhaps a. waste.of the city staff's time and taxpayers' money to continue any further With tills project approval until this dispute is resolved. 2. Many 0fthe original concerns of area residents, Planning Commission members, and City Council members have not yet been addressed, and in the case.ofRnm River Meadows, have been essentially ignored. These include but are not limited to overall density, the length of cul-de-sacs, and the lack of any ' benefit to the City and residents for granting a PUD rezoning. Some.of the details of these concerns will be brought up in future points.' 3. The purpose ora PUD was to give a builder a right to increase housing, density in exchange for that builder providing an area of common benefit such as a public square or park. Whether the area is zoned K-1 or PUD, the builder still has to comply with federal regulations regarding the wetlands involved. Merely using .a PUD designation as a way to maximize profit by increasing density on an area which is difficult to develop because of the extent of federally protected wetlands without providing a useable common area is a gross misuse of this new and vague city law. Mayor Garnet himself ~tated that these developments were lacking a central useable common area and that this needed to be changed. Since the only solution provided involved building a boardwalk across federally protected wetland (which would require filling in that wetland), I believe more work should be done on solving the common green space problem. Suggestion will be provided in future points. 4. PUD zoning allows a change from 3 units per acre to 4 units per acre. The spirit of this law indicates a lot size that is 33 percent smaller than the I0,800 square feet currently allowed in an R-I zone. The proposed lot sizes of 3,600 and 3,772 square foot lots are approximately 67 percent smaller than currently allowed. We should respect the fact that the reason PUD does not allow 6 units per acre is perhaps because of all the associated problems with drainage, access, traffic, plowing, emergency services and effect on wetland and surrounding residents. In this case, because of the wetlands, the practical density is 6 units per acre and should not be allowed. In an effort to comply with city recommendations and federal wetland laws, Shade Tree Cottages proposal has brought their density down to 2.75/Rum 1Liver Meadows has made little attempt to address concerns. I suggest that they would do welt to follow the example of their neighboring developer, and may find they have a proposal that is more acceptable to all if they reduce their overall density into the range that Shade Tree Cottages has. Please note the misstatement on the "Recommendation" portion of this case which state that the preliminary plat for the development of Rum River Estates is 3.4 units per acre,' This is NOT within the allowed density established within the R-1 distr/ct as is stated. 5. It has been noted that density transitioning does not apply to my property adjacent to the northwest comer Of Rum River Meadows as it is part of the River Pines addition. However my next door neighbors -146-