Agenda - Council - 03/24/2009 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

He stated one of the .items previously discussed by the Planning Commission had to do with closing off roads to address traffic flow. He stated he would like to see some policy thinking with respect to connector streets. Associate Planner Gladhill stated a joint work session will be scheduled with the Council and that topic could be discussed with the Council. Community Development Director Miller stated on February 11 and 12, the Council and Department Heads will hold a strategic planning meeting; in addition, the Council will be scheduling joint meetings with all the boards and commissions to discuss priorities and strategic planning. Commissioner Brauer stated it will be helpful to know what the Council's priorities are before the Planning Commission work plan is finalized. Associate Planner Gladhill asked if the Planning Commission wanted to forward the work plan to the Council as a resolution or whether it wanted to keep the document informal at this time. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to keep the work plan informal at this time, noting that priorities may change throughout the year. Case #4: Discussion on Flag Pole Regulations; Case of City of Ramsey Management Intern Haugen stated the flag regulations in the City Code are currently in conflict with respect to height limitations. He stated Section 9.12.03, subd. 11 (Flags), restricts flag pole height to 25 feet; however, Section 9.11.11 (Permitted Encroachments) specifically excludes flag poles from any height restrictions. He noted one way to rectify the situation is to amend the Code and another possible option would be to restrict flag pole height to the maximum allowable building height in a zoning district. He indicated staff believes consideration should be given to a setback requirement for flag poles. Commissioner Levine asked what other cities have done in this case. Associate Planner Gladhill replied that the regulations are all over the board and it depends on the needs of that community. Community Development Director Miller stated it would make sense to say it would be the maximum allowable height for any structure in a zoning district within that district. Chairperson Nixt suggested if the City is going to increase the height, it ought to look at some setback greater than the required setback or equal to 1.5 the height of the pole in order to address any safety issues. Associate Planner Gladhill noted the cell tower ordinances state the setbacks can be 1-1.5 times the height of the tower. Planning Commission/February 5, 2009 Page 8 of 10