My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 02/12/2002
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2002
>
Agenda - Council - 02/12/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 11:04:08 AM
Creation date
9/3/2003 3:47:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
02/12/2002
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
433
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).
View images
View plain text
-42- <br /> <br />adopted the March 2001 Comprehensive Plan on December 18, 2001. The 2001 Comprehensive <br />Plan identifies this area being designated for Places to Shop and therefore a comprehensive plan <br />amendment will also be required. At their January 3, 2002 meeting, the Planning Commission <br />held a public hearing and reviewed the request to rezone the subject property to R3-U. The <br />Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the request. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendr/ksen inquired as to what the requirement was to approve the request. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that the Council would need to adopt findings of fact and then <br />introduce the ordinance and then adopt the ordinance on a 3/5% vote after the Met Council <br />approves the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec reviewed fred!nc~ 8 through 11. <br />Councilmember Zimmer~-A~' felt that: the development would change the essential character of <br /> <br />Consensus of the ~. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendhksen stg~d thi{~e fin3ings are ~Mng if ~e existing roads c~ h~dle <br />· e plat and there is no ,ossibi~, of ~:~i~}:{o T.H. ~47 ~d there are no roads to ~e west of <br />· e proposed development so ~ey are;}iNited to 15.~.,~. Ovenue to ~e somh and they don't <br />,pically place them within 300 feet ~.~+a caj~'}~e~ection. He did not feel that one access to <br />the development was adequate. <br /> <br />Mayor G~ec replied that the ~dings pc=aN not roads withn ~e <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendfiksen stated ~at Ce ink,tincture in <br />access is not possible along T.H. ~47 ~d thee c~ ody be one accesg~ 153~ Avenue. <br /> <br />Consensus of the Council was to delete findNg ~10. '.~i~~:' · <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson encouraged the developer to accommodate more than one access. <br /> <br />Mr. Ebe noted that they are attempting to work with the landowners to the' west to connect the <br />development. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Kurak, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, to adopt Findings of <br />Fact # ~ relating to a request to rezone the subject property from R-IR Residential, B-I <br />Business, and B-2 Business to R-3U Multi-Family Residential, as amended. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Councilmember Hendriksen requested clarification that findings #9 and #10 <br />were deleted. Mayor Gamec replied yes. <br /> <br />City Council/January 22, 2002 <br /> Page 16 of 27 <br /> <br /> I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.