Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Dan Jacobs, 13740 Dolomite Street, stated that his property is directly behind this site and would <br />welcome a Jiffy Lube before they would welcome the rental units that are proposed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig clarified that these are not rental units, but twin home units that will sell <br />for $250,000 to $300,000. <br /> <br />Mr. Jacobs stated that with a Jiffy Lube, the City would have controls on the property that they <br />would not with the proposed use. He stated that Mr. Holm, the previous owner of Super Bowl <br />had a junkyard behind his property, but the new owner has been the best neighbor imaginable. . <br />He stated the neighbors are not turned off by the idea of a commercial business because they <br />understood that this property was zoned commercial when they purchased their property. <br /> <br />Rich W olens, 6726 13 7th Avenue, stated that he had been a resident of Ramsey for 19 years and <br />has concerns about town homes, in general. He showed the City Council examples of town <br />homes in the City that are supposed to be $250,000 and $265,000 homes that were being sold for <br />$145,000 and rental signs are popping up all over. He showed pictures of the home being built <br />next to his property, that is about 11 feet from this site, as well as pictures of homes that are 100, <br />200 and 300 feet away from this property. He stated that the homes are between $300,000 and <br />$1,000,000 and are some of the nicest homes in the City. He stated that to put this type of <br />development by these homes would be a travesty. He stated that he feels a past City Council was <br />hoodwinked into allowing a triple X bookstore that the community did not want. He stated that <br />he is a former Spring Lake Park Councilmember and urged the City Council to do what they <br />were elected to do and listen to the people. He stated that it is very clear that the people do not <br />want this development. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen asked what the front yard footage is for the home being built south of the <br />property and what the Murphy property frontage amount is. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler stated that the lot is 90 feet wide and the home is approximately 70 <br />feet wide and the Murphy property is 244 feet of total frontage. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen asked what Councilmember Elvig meant when he stated that it would not <br />be financially feasible to build single family homes on this property. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that there were some assessments added to this property for <br />improvements that were about $60,000. He stated that he understands this is not the problem of <br />the City Council, however the residents have stated that they do not want this proposal. He <br />stated that the City cannot control what type of commercial use would move onto the property. <br />He stated that it could be anything from a bar/restaurant, to a Jiffy Lube, to potentially an adult <br />book store. He stated that the City does not have full control and Places to Work is Places to <br />Work. <br /> <br />The residents spoke from their seats and noted that they would support anything but town homes <br />on this land. - <br /> <br />City Council /October 9, 2007 <br />Page 10 of 25 <br /> <br />-21- <br />