Laserfiche WebLink
Doug Hiltz, 7711 178th Lane NW, commented that the neighbors enjoy the privacy of the secluded <br />neighborhood which is quiet and peaceful and home to wildlife. He stated that losing the park <br />would be a detriment to the neighborhood and the wildlife that use that area. He did not want to <br />see a connection through the park. <br />Chairperson Bauer referenced the larger lots proposed on the northern end and possible future <br />subdivision of those lots. He commented that if there is not a second connection the only way to <br />do that would be to request a variance for a longer cul-de-sac, therefore it would seem further <br />subdivision could be limited by not issuing an additional variance. <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl noted that additional language could be added to the Preliminary <br />and/or Final Plat stating that additional subdivision requests would need to come before the City <br />Council. <br />Chairperson Bauer noted that formal action from the Commission is not required tonight but any <br />concerns and comments should be raised before the applicant invests additional funds into this <br />process. <br />Commissioner Walker commended the developer for limiting the number of lots and keeping the <br />rural feel of Ramsey in this area. He stated that he would prefer to leave the park and not provide <br />the second connection. He stated that he likes that the developer chose larger lots at a lesser <br />number in order to fit with this area of Ramsey. <br />Commissioner Anderson commented that once again this would create the dilemma of issuing a <br />variance for things outside of the City Code. He stated that this is the same issue as Bowers Drive. <br />He noted that longer cul-de-sacs create a safety concern as noted by Public Works and Public <br />Safety. He asked the liability the City would have if there were an emergency and access cannot <br />be gained. He stated that perhaps it would be time to review the maximum cul-de-sac length and <br />determine if an adjustment should be made to City Code. He stated that he would love to see this <br />development go through but could not support something that would put the City or the residents <br />at risk. He stated that he would like input from Public Safety and Public Works on the appropriate <br />length of a cul-de-sac. <br />Commissioner Gengler commented that she supports the proposal. She realizes that it may not be <br />ideal but given the unique circumstances of the property and adjustments that have been made to <br />the road width, she can support the application. <br />Commissioner VanScoy commented that he appreciates the comments from the residents on 178th <br />and likes that the developer is proposing fewer lots. He stated that he does have concern with the <br />lack of a second access, as that is critical for long term development, noting that this would <br />landlock 40 acres. He commented that making the property nice for a few individuals is not the <br />best for the City. He stated that this is the first time that he has seen a sketch plan where the <br />Council has developed a resolution to influence the mission. <br />Commissioner Dunaway commented that in reviewing the site plan and sketch plan he was unable <br />to see another potential access for the site. He stated that he was unsure the Commission could <br />