12/06/83 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

II I II I 2. Flintwood II development incompatible with existing Flintwood I development (the above structures border existing urban 1 acre lots without any buffer zone or open space) 3. Many mature trees would have to be removed. B. Loss of privacy/quality of life I 1. High population density on small lots immediately bordering existing Flintwood I lots without buffer I a. Population density of Flintwood I is approximately 3 people/ acre I I b. Population density of bordering Flintwood II development would be approximately 36-50 people/acre, not counting the apalOtinents. . 2. Commercial and aprtment property butting up against existing Flintwood I lots I a. Parking lots bordering Flintwood I lots I b. Increase in noise, strange people and general loss of serenity, as well as unpleasant view. 3. Many residents would feel compelled to move out. I C. The planned development would cause a drainage problem or cause unnecessary drain pipe expense and loss of woods. I I 1. Half of Flintwood I is now drained naturally by a ditch for free. 2. The new development would eliminate this natural drain and necessitate construction of a new drainage system. I 3. Construction of this drainage system would destroy many beautiful, mature trees. D. High traffic through street right through the development. I I II. The plan should also be unacceptable to the City, as well as Flintwodd I residents. 1~. For the reasons mentioned earlier. I I I B. Traffic problems caused by population density which is too high for reasonably constructed and located roads. 1. 355 housing units means about 1000 people concentrated in approximately 50 acres. (600-700 cars). a. 10% of present Ra&sey population living on less than .25% of Ramsey land. 2. Ramsey's present population density is approximately .5 people/acre. I SP P & Z/November 29, lCOC Public Hear.ing Page 2 of 8