2015-05-06_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, May 6, 2015 Page 2 that these homes would be considered “move-up” homes anticipated at a price of over 45 $350,000, helping the City meet the goals of its strategic planning efforts, and allowing for 46 availability of more affordable homes opening up for first-time home buyers. 47 Mr. Lloyd noted that, due to the subject property’s location abutting County Road B under 48 Ramsey County jurisdiction and MN Highway 36 under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota 49 Department of Transportation (MnDOT), comments had been solicited from both 50 agencies and their respective engineers. Mr. Lloyd advised that earlier today, staff had 51 received a response from MnDOT addressing discrepancies in the width of the right-of- 52 way, outlining their conditions for approval, and future potential sound barrier provisions 53 along this corridor; this letter will be included as part of the public record to be reviewed 54 by the City Council. 55 As noted in the staff report, Mr. Lloyd advised that staff was recommending approval of 56 the proposed Preliminary Plat of the property at 311 County Road B, based on the 57 comments and findings detailed in the report and subject to the conditions as noted. 58 Commission/Staff Discussion 59 In noting the MnDOT right-of-way, Member Stellmach asked if since the right-of-way is 60 larger than depicted on the plat, could it affect minimum lot sizes for those lots, especially 61 those on the northern most portion. 62 Mr. Lloyd clarified that the MnDOT letter appeared to address the 10’ discrepancy in the 63 total length of the right-of-way line, not in its width to the highway. 64 In reviewing that area, Member Bull questioned if the current construction activity he 65 observed was on this site or on the adjacent property. 66 Mr. Lloyd clarified that the current construction was occurring on the adjacent property, 67 addressed as 297 County Road B. As noted in the background review detailed in the staff 68 report, Mr. Lloyd advised that, due to the denial of the last preliminary plat, that property 69 now remains a separate parcel. 70 Member Bull noted the substantial ravine on Farrington Street at the bend onto 71 Sandhurst Drive, and asked Mr. Lloyd what the plans were for wetland access on Lot 1. 72 Mr. Lloyd displayed the grading map related to that specific lot; reviewing the existing 73 easement and how it corresponded to the ravine and lower areas for stormwater 74 drainage and proposed relocation of the future easement driven more by drain 75 infrastructure versus overland drainage further east. 76 Member Bull sought assurance, confirmed by Mr. Lloyd, that the Engineering Department 77 would look hard at the cover area on the corner to ensure it didn’t impede stormwater 78 drainage as part of the City Engineer’s review throughout the planning and building 79 permit application process. 80 Member Gitzen questioned if part of tonight’s approval for this Preliminary Plat should 81 include a condition vacating the existing 20’ easement. 82 Mr. Lloyd stated that while it may be appropriate to include such a condition, it was 83 something the City would pursue as a matter of course, since the vacation would be in 84 place for the benefit of future property owners and part of the new easement yet to be 85 drafted. In his discussions with the City Engineer, Mr. Lloyd advised that he would prefer 86 to handle the easement vacation as part of the process after final plat approval to ensure 87 replacement of the easement was in place before vacating the existing easement. 88 At the request of Member Gitzen, Mr. Lloyd confirmed that the Outlot dedication would be 89 deeded to the City. 90 At the request of Member Gitzen as to whether or not the access easements for the 91 Outlot would be granted at the same time, Mr. Lloyd clarified that they would be part and 92 parcel of the future drainage and utility easements. 93