Agenda - Council - 07/26/2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

15751 Potassium Street NV/ Ramsey, MN 55303 April 6, 2005 Ann: City Planning Staffand 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, I am driven to strongly request that you deny approval of the preliminary plat for these developments for the following reasons. 1. Residents along the Potassium access continue to dispute the ownership of the rOad, and I am told that they have retained a lawyer in this matter. A resident stated 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 the 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 owned.by residents involved in this dispute it is perhaps a waste of the city staff's time and taxp~iyers' mOney to continue any further with this project approval until this dispute is resolved. 2. Many of the original concerns of area residents, Planning Commission members, and City Council members have not yet been addressed, and in the case.of Rum 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 of a PUD was to give a builder a fight 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 R- 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 G-amec himself stated 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 wilt be provided in future points. 4. PUD zoning allows a change fi-om 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 10, S00 square feet currently allowed in an R-1 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 River Meadows has made little attempt to address concerns. I suggest that they would do well 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 district as is stated. 5. It has been noted that density transitioning does r~ot apply to my property adjacent to the northwest comer 0fRum River Meadows as it is part of the River Pines addition. However my next door neighbors