Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Council Business <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec called the regular City Council meeting back to order at 7:23 p.m. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen asked if there is appropriate buffering from this property. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon replied along the eastern edge of the property into <br />the residential area there is a required buffer that needs to occur. As he recalls that was to have <br />been accomplished in 2004 with a wrought iron fence. This has been revised due to the different <br />configuration. It will be considered as part of the site plan review, but buffering is required with <br />a separation by landscaping and other screening materials. Staff is sensitive to this property <br />burting up to residential property; that was a significant discussion in 2004. <br /> <br />Mr. Schmidt stated there will be a six foot privacy fence down the north property line and the <br />east property line, and on the east property line there is ponding intended. The discussion at the <br />Planning COlmnission was with running the privacy fencing on his side of the property inside the <br />cul-de-sac because there will be snow piled up, and he will be planting some evergreen trees on <br />the north side of the cul-de-sac. When he purchased this property the road was intended to go <br />through to County Road 56, which was to be the access point, and when the access was put in <br />further to the south with Town Center the County would not allow the origliial access. The City <br />had said to put in the cul-de-sac so there would be a turnaround for fire, etc. The reason he did <br />not go through with the 2004 approval is that the County came in and tore up the road to make <br />improvements and the approval had expired before everythlllg was complete. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey commented in 2004 the neighbors were extremely upset about the access <br />from the neighborhood to this property. The staff report referenced that access to this property <br />would be from Bunker Lake Boulevard as a right-inlright-out. He asked if the access off of <br />Ramsey Boulevard would be a right-inlright-outas well. <br /> <br />Mr. Schmidt replied both accesses will be right-inlright-out. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ehrig noted tIns goes back further and was proposed at one point to be <br />townhouses. The neighborhood was upset with that notion and seemed to be more amicable to <br />the proposal for storage sheds. He inquired about the vision for this property. <br /> <br />Mr. Schmidt stated the storage facility will be a controlled access storage facility. The first <br />building on Ramsey Boulevard will be 18 and 15 feet wide with 40 foot bays for Class A motor <br />homes. The second building will be 20 by 20 foot garages for boats, etc. The third building will <br />be single entry and will likely have 15 by 30 foot bays. For the commercial piece he is <br />considering a C-Store on Lot 2, which is the furthest north commercial lot. There is potential for <br />a liquor store or a day care and a potential office bank on the comer lot on Bunker Lake <br />Boulevard. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig asked if there will be any access for the storage or retail shops through the <br />back ofthis property. <br /> <br />City Council /August 28, 2007 <br />Page 6 of 33 <br /> <br />P54 <br />