My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 04/18/2000 - Jt Mtg w Park and Rec
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2000
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 04/18/2000 - Jt Mtg w Park and Rec
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/20/2025 2:12:25 PM
Creation date
5/22/2003 9:16:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Title
Jt Mtg w Park and Rec
Document Date
04/18/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
Commissioner Rolfe stated that it must be located in the right-of-way, whether referring to a <br />sidewalk or a trail. <br /> <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos discussed the history of the ordinance and the need to get a <br />somewhat flexible requirement in place until the whole issue can be addressed with the Chapter 9 <br />rewrite. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cook agreed the ordinance should have some flexibility allowing the City to <br />consider developments on a case-by-case basis. It shouldn't be so stringent that a variance will <br />be required to obtain what is in the community's best interest. Commissioner Cook felt the <br />eight-foot width was important to accommodate the varied traffic of walkers, rollerbladers, <br />joggers, etc. Also, if the City were to be responsible for snow removal, an eight-foot width <br />would be required to accommodate the equipment. He also felt the construction material should <br />be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on the area. <br /> <br />Commissioner Droegemueller agreed that eight-foot sidewalks work fine on thoroughfares, <br />however, when in the urban area with the smaller yards, eight feet is obnoxious. He felt four feet <br />is perfectly easy for the homeowner to maintain, but eight feet is too much. He felt the width <br />should vary, getting larger on thoroughfares and in the rural area. <br /> <br />Commissioner Anderson suggested a four to five-foot ribbon of concrete in the urban area and an <br />eight-foot asphalt sidewalk in the rural area. He felt it important to make that distinction. He <br />also mentioned that this ordinance only applies to new subdivisions, and will not be forced upon <br />existing neighborhoods. He suggested the sidewalk should be one foot from the house side of <br />the easement. He also had no qualms about asking the homeowner to plow a five-foot sidewalk. <br /> <br />Commissioner Droegemueller addressed the question of sidewalks on cul-de-sacs, stating a <br />sidewalk is unnecessary because the traffic isn't there to pose a safety issue. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rolfe stated many communities are using five-foot sidewalks and they are quite <br />attractive. He noted two to three feet from the property side of the easement is needed to allow <br />for curb stops. <br /> <br />Mr. Boos stated that MSA streets with trails are one foot off the property line, and there's no <br />problem with them. <br /> <br />Commissioner Dempsey inquired as to the initial purpose of the ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Boos explained that the Council did not direct the draft ordinance, but it was initiated by <br />staff because of problems occurring with high-density subdivisions. Staff felt it prudent to <br />examine this as part of subdivision design. An eight-foot width seems to be practical, especially <br />when only on one side of the street; if a prospective homeowner doesn't care for sidewalks, they <br />just select a lot on the other side of the street. <br /> <br />Planning Commission-Park and Recreation Commission/April 18, 2000 <br /> Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.