My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Focus Group
>
Comprehensive Plan
>
Comprehensive Plan (old)
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
Focus Group
>
Focus Group
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2009 10:49:29 AM
Creation date
1/15/2009 10:49:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Miscellaneous
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Individual PrODertv RiS!hts <br /> <br />It was agreed that there are definite issues related to individual property rights. The issue is what should <br />the rights be of existing landowners to develop their lands vs those of residents surrounding larger land <br />holdings? Sub-issues include rights of existing residents ~ new and business unsightliness, which is <br />essentially a problem needing enforcement. While there was some discussion about balancing property <br />owner vs surrounding resident rights, this was difficult to define. Some feel that the existing surrounding <br />owners should have more rights than those who develop the adjacent land. <br /> <br />Densitv of nODulation <br /> <br />Fred Hoisington asked the group to define high-density residential development. Some members of the <br />Focus Group suggested that apartments represent high-density development. Others felt that anything <br />approaching y...acre lots is high density. Others expressed the opinion that high-density is relative to <br />what is next to it. There was strong support for density diversity, but not in every neighborhood. There <br />was some sense that transitions are needed where urban and rural densities meet. <br /> <br />Housinl! diversitv <br /> <br />There is clearly an issue with housing diversity. Some want total diversity including mixed-densities, <br />affordable housing, apartments, townhomes, senior's housing, and higher value single-family homes. <br />While there was general agreement on the need for diversity. the issue is how much and in what locations <br />should such housing Occur. <br /> <br />MUSA exnanslon <br /> <br />The issue here is clearly yes n no. It was generally agreed that the present charter makes MUSA <br />expansion only slightly possible even in a presidential election. There was generally agreement that <br />MUSA expansion for commercial and industrial development is good, though there is still some suspicion <br />associated with it. <br /> <br />The issue, then, is: MUSA expansion for residential development to accommodate urban densities. <br />Some members oppose any and all MUSA expansion. Other issues include the current method of MUSA <br />expansion by referendum. Some agree, others disagree with this procedure. <br /> <br />The issue to be resolved here is where MUSA expansion might be acceptable and, if so, should the charter <br />have to be amended each time to accommodate it? <br /> <br />The next meeting of the Focus Group will be at 7:00 p.rn. on December 16, 1997 at Anoka Electric <br />Cooperative. <br /> <br />The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. <br /> <br />"..,..,,........,,,,, I. In I ~""I T C T nu <br /> <br />O("'OOO("'("'_:::>TO <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.