My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 10/10/2001
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Parks and Recreation Commission
>
2001
>
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 10/10/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/27/2025 9:58:17 AM
Creation date
7/8/2003 2:47:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Parks and Recreation Commission
Document Date
10/10/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
110
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City. Attorney Goodrich replied that the opinion the Council has received in regards to the <br />effectiveness of the Charter amendment would also be the same for the traffic generation <br />analysis. <br /> <br /> Community Development Director Frolik stated that she was not sure if they added the language <br />· to City Code regarding the traffic generation analysis, but staff does feel it is good policy to <br /> require the analysis. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich reviewed the language of the Charter Amendment, but noted that the <br />City Council, through legal recommendations, found that Chapter I4.2 is not valid under State <br />statues. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak noted that the prope~/is governed by a Court order and judgement. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich explained that the City. is under a Court order dated may 8, 2001, which <br />he reviewed. He noted that the City cannot place any density control on the property that did not <br />exist as of May 15, 2000. <br /> <br />Counciknember Hendriksen inquired if the Council had passed a density transition ordinance <br />prior to that date it would have been in effect. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that he was not sure how the Court would have ruled on that <br />issue. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that on the 1995 Comprehensive Plan the property was zoned R-iR <br />and it was Court ordered to be zoned as P,.-1U. She inquired what the lot size requirements were <br />under the R-1 U zoning. <br /> <br />Community Development Frolik replied that the minimum lot size would be t0,800 square feet. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that they as a Council cannot change that minimum requirement <br />because density transitioning is not permitted on this parcel because of'the Court order. <br /> <br />City Attorney' Goodrich replied that was correct. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen inquired if in the 1995 Comprehensive Plan doesn't it permit <br />platting in the R-1U district to be one acre lots. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik replied that it is City Code that the lot size is a <br />minimum of one acre without City sewer and water under the R-IU zoning regx~lations. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the developer could chose to plat any-thing above the <br />minimum and they can make lots of one acre in size without sewer and water. <br /> <br />City. Council/September 1.1, 2001 <br /> Page 9 of 22 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.