Laserfiche WebLink
I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I. <br /> I <br /> I <br /> <br /> I <br /> I <br />'1 <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> i <br /> I <br /> i <br /> I <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />There was none. <br /> <br />Motion by Chairperson Nixt, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to clOSe the public hearing as <br />requested by Larry Hickman, Plants and Things. '- .. <br /> <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: <br />Reeve and Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: None2 <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Johnson; Brauer, Kociscak, <br /> <br />The public hearing closed at 7:40 p.m. <br /> <br />Commission Business <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik stated this pUblic hearing will be renoticed. <br /> <br />Case #3: Request fop Sketch Plan Review of sandy Acres; Case of Michael SchelkoPh <br /> <br />Community Development Intern Geisler stated that the City received an 'application from <br />Michael Schelkoph for sketch plan approval to subdivide his homestead (approximately. 4.7 <br />'acres) on Ramsey Blvd. at 153rd Avenue NW. The property is zoned R-1 Residential and is <br />located in the Central Rural Reserve area. The proposed minor sUbdivision is a replat' of the <br />Schelkoph homestead that will create two new lots. Proposed Lot 1 is approximately 2.11 acres, <br />and proposed Lot 2 is approximately 2:60 acres. The applicant was granted a variance by the. <br />Board of Adjustment to the 2.5-acre minimum lot size and the '4 units per 40 acres density On <br />August 29, 2002. The existing homestead will remain on Proposed Lot 2. The applicant has <br />verified that a primary and secondary septic system can be accommodated on both lots. A copy <br />of the sketch plan has been sent to Anoka County;' while no comments have been received to <br />date, staff is anticipating that the County will require dedicated access on Ramsey Blvd. to <br />prohibit future accesses. Staff recommends sketch Plan approval. <br /> <br />Michael Schelkoph, applicant, stated this Process has been an eye-opener for him. He stated that <br />it would be a good thing if a resident could ask for help from staff to get a form letter identifying <br />the process and approximate cost. He stated he has .already spent $8,000 and is only two-thirds <br />through the process. He noted a $.375 drainage fee and stated that the coUnty has been draining <br />Ramsey Boulevard onto his property with a County Storm sewer for the last 20 years. He stated <br />the storm sewer is down 153rd Avenue and enters his property so there is already a storm sewer <br />easement. He stated he was not assessed but the County took'hiS property and installed it. <br /> <br />Mr. Schelkoph stated he was paid by the County for some lowland property but he does not want <br />to have to pay for a drainage fee sincehis property already drainS everyone's Property. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski stated the per unit fee is $375. He explained that Mr. SCheikoph is <br />located on a currently landlocked wetland and the City has acquired money in the past to acquire <br /> <br />Planning Commissionf~ovember 7, 2002 <br /> Page 4 of 16 <br /> <br />-163- <br /> <br /> <br />