Agenda - Planning Commission - 09/04/2003

Home

Case #5 Request for Comprehefisive Plan Amendment; Case of City of Ramsey Presentation Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon advised the 2001 Comprehensive Plan shows the property south of Highway 10, west of the wayside rest area as Low Density Residential. At the May 1st, 2003 Planning Commission meeting, City Staff brought forward the rezoning of these properties to comply with the Comprehensive Plan. During the Public Hearing, the property owners brought forward their concerns regarding changing their property to R-1 Residential zoning, suggesting that business was a better use of the Highway 10 property than residential. He indicated the Planning Commission tabled action on the rezoning and directed staff to forward the matter to the City Council for its consideration. Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon further adk, ised the City Council reviewed the matter at their June l 0, 2003 work session. After discussing possible appropriate uses for the property, the City Council directed staff to draft a comprehensive plan amendment to change the northern third of the properties to Places to Shop and the southern portion to Low Density Residential. The Council indicated that residential, uses were most appropriate directly on the Mississippi River, while commercial uses were more appropriate directly on Highway 10. He indicated the parcels are large enough to accommodate both types of development in the area. He stated Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Chairperson Jotmson asked what the zoning is on the other side of the city. Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon stated he does not believe Staff has an answer. He thinks it is commercial uses,, but he does not know wha~ zoning it is. Public Hearing Tom Austin, 9404 Highway 10, stated his home is the white stripe on the map. He indicated five years ago they decided to build a home there, after purchasing the property two ok three years prior to that. He explained there was a home on it when they bought it that was being rented, and in the process of refurbishing the house they determined it' was beyond repair. When they decided to build a new home they found it was zoned commercial, so he had to have it rezoned residential. He indicated there was really only three lots there; one empty and two with homes. He believes it should be residential, and he believes the farm already has a plat on record to subdivide it. Joe Nathe indicated he owns the majority of the piece in question. He stated his brother was here when they tried to rezone it from B-1 to R-1. He indicated Highway 10 is a death trap, and no one would buy a home on this land. He noted the other side of Highway 1'0 is already zoned commercial, and if you look at the property you can see it should not be anything except commercial. He indicated it has been commercial since he has owned it, which has been since 1980. He stated the property was not for sale, and noted he was in agreement with this proposal, but was not in agreement with the previous one. Planning Commission/August 7, 2003 Page 11 of 19 Pll