Minutes - Council - 02/25/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Case #3: Request for Sketch Plan Approval of Apple Ridge; Case of Good Value Homes Zoning Administrator Frolik noted that Mr. John Peterson is present representing Good Value Homes. He would like City Council's input and comments on the Apple Ridge Subdivision, in addition to the comments he received from the Planning Commission. The subdivision is located on the west side of T.H. #47 and is 60 acres proposed to be divided into water and sewered, single family lots. The property is eligible for approximately 180 lots. The first sketch plan Mr. Peterson presented proposed 147 lots. Subsequent to that, the developer devised another plan that consists of 144 lots. He's held public information meetings with the neighborhood and also had the Planning Commission review this plan. The major concerns are traffic impact and tree removal. Mr. Peterson has a second, alternative plan. John Peterson, Good Value Homes, pointed out'that a statement had been made that developers always go with the maximum density. In this parcel, we could have put in 179 homes and all would have met the City's minimum standards. He presented a sketch of what the subdivision would look like if it was platted with 179 homes. He explained that the f'n'st concept he brought for review had concerns expressed with traffic etc. Thus, he came back with a second plan. The second plan eliminated the problem of traffic moving from County Road #5 across the neighborhood, across the south area of the Apple Ridge subdivision to Highway #47. We had 10 lots adjacent to these four (shown on a map) and 15 adjacent to these five lots (again referring to a map). A comment had been made about this becoming a race track. This plan eliminates the possibility of traffic moving east and west. We significantly reduced the number of lots on the western boundary. There is now eight instead of 10 and on the north, there is 10 rather than the 15 properties. On the northern property line, the average width of all lots is now 128.8 feet and on the western boundary, the average lot adjacent is 119.9 feet. By City standards of sewer and water areas, these are very large lots. He added that you cannot reasonably go beyond what he is proposing in a sewer and water area and have a project be feasible. He summarized that he made the lots larger, changed the traffic flow and he has been able to make very large lots in the area that are treed. The center part of the plat will have a lot of trees. These lots are very deep - deeper than standard. We have wooded back yards, however, the trees in the front yards are more difficult to save. We are trying to save some. He stated he would like to consider moving the setbacks forward to 30 feet or going to the 50 foot right-of-way. We can save more trees if we can move these setbacks forward a bit. One other idea that came up as part of that discussion is to eliminate a part of the road. If they eliminate that, then the traffic would move east/west across the center of the plat. He continued that with that change, they have significantly reduced the impact of traffic on this neighborhood. Teri Svare, 6015 - 158th Lane NW, Ramsey, asked what the average size of the lots are and how it is possible to get 143 homes in that area. Mr. Peterson explained that all lots significantly exceed the minimum size required by the City. All lots that butt up to the four homes on the west are over 15,000 feet each. Some of the lots with treed back yards are 20,900 feet. The width of the lots are basically 85 feet. He pointed out a lot that is 11,900 and noted that this is one of the smaller ones and that 10,800 is the standard. A gentleman pointed out that 43,560 square feet is one acre. Ms. Svare presented a sketch showing 120 lots and anything that touches an existing area is equal to the lot it is touching. She suggested these lots should access onto T.H. #47. She added that the neighborhood feels this plan is reasonable and livable. City Council/February 25, 1997 Page 16 of 28