My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 10/06/2005
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2005
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 10/06/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 3:56:03 PM
Creation date
3/21/2006 6:37:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
10/06/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
that, but if the Park Commission feels strongly about putting a comer park next to another comer <br />park, separated by a street, it makes no sense to him and he would want to know details about <br />what they have planned to develop that park. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson indicated his thought would be that if the park was over on the other side <br />it would provide a relief park and a buffer as they have discussed. <br /> <br />Civil Engineer II, Leonard Linton stated that the thought with the park is that it would be part of <br />a larger park for the City to use. He indicated this has been on the Parks plan for years, but they <br />do need to go back and look at it with the Parks Commission, and he believes they will feel that <br />the four acres will be inadequate for the volume of people. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt indicated he appreciates that insight, but the issue is density and buffering for <br />that area. He stated there are a variety of options, and moving the park is one that seems most <br />obvious. <br /> <br />Jason Wadell, Director of Land Development, stated there are a lot of emphasis being put on the <br />smaller lots. He indicated that even if they were to look at standard lot size for single-family lots <br />for that area it would only result in a decrease of one lot. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated the point is well taken. He indicated there is the lot size, and then the <br />density buffer transition, and they need some flexibility on both issues. He added that he is also <br />not deaf to the local residents. He stated he would like to find a compromise your objectives to <br />market the sight and their objective to maintain a peaceful and quiet neighborhood. <br /> <br />Mr. Wadell stated that when it goes to the Park Board he would like to hear their objectives on <br />what they would like on the site. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson indicated that from his point of view he is less concerned with the lot <br />size. He stated he thinks it works in this area, but it is the density transition that is the concern. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated that he feels strongly that he would like to see compliance in that area <br />considering the lot sizes but it may not be possible. He indicated he wanted to talk about how <br />they will tie this development into future developments, because he thinks that is missing. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer stated that if this is supposed to be new urban that goes against what you <br />would think it could be. He indicated if you connected the commercial with the residential you <br />could achieve a whole neighborhood. <br /> <br />Ms. Goodroad indicated that they can still achieve that through connections and parkways <br />without having the road go right through the center. Mr. Wadell stated that he thinks the street <br />labeled Llama is a standard 60-foot right-of-way and was meant to be the collector street that <br />would continue south and head west along the railroad tracks, thus leaving the necessary space <br />from the railroad tracks to the residential area. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/October 6, 2005 <br /> Page 23 of 29 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.