Agenda - Council - 09/14/2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motion carried. 7.03: Request for Final Plat Review of River's Bend 5 th Addition; Case of the City of Ramsey Associate Planner Gladhill reviewed the staff report. Motion by Councilmember Ramsey, seconded by Councilmember McGlone, to adopt Resolution #10 -07 -157 granting Final Plat Approval of River's Bend 5 th Addition, contingent upon compliance with the City Staff Review Letter dated July 21, 2010 and subject to review by the City Attorney as to legal form. Further discussion: Council expressed concern that this had taken so long. Councilmember Elvig stated he wanted this to get moving. Planning Manager Miller noted there were outstanding issues that needed to be rectified including the outhouse and the platting of the street. City Attorney Goodrich summarized the steps he had taken regarding the closing. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Ramsey, Councilmembers Elvig, Jeffrey, and McGlone. Voting No: Councilmember Look. Absent: Councilmembers Dehen and Wise. 7.04: Consider Memorandum of Understanding between City of Ramsey and Anoka County in Regards to Rum River `In- Holding Parcel' at 18055 Roanoke St NW Associate Planner Gladhill reviewed the staff report. He noted John VonDeLinde, Parks Director of Anoka County and Terry Sutherland, representative of 18055 Roanoke Street NW property owner, were present for any questions. Councilmember Look believed this situation has spun out of control on an issue the City had not requested. Councilmember Elvig stated he did not see this as an adversarial position. Mayor Ramsey stated it appeared the property owner was not interested in having their property designated in anything other than residential. He asked why a homeowner should have that kind of cloud on their property. He indicated he did not agree with eminent domain for parks. John VonDeLinde summarized the County's position and planning the County did for parks and trails. He noted in order for this to be changed, a Master Plan amendment would need to be prepared, which was a long process. He indicated they only dealt with willing sellers and the County did not do eminent domain for parkland and if the property owner did not want to sell, it would not happen. Councilmember Look asked why the County didn't change their plan to match the City's plan. City Council / July 27, 2010 Page 6 of 11.