My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 01/09/2001
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2001
>
Agenda - Council - 01/09/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 12:17:58 PM
Creation date
9/4/2003 10:20:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
01/09/2001
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.
/
464
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
Public Hearinl~ <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt called the public hearing to order at 7:44 p.m. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik recalled that the Planning commission conducted a <br />special meeting on Monday, October 16, 2000, to finalize the draft ordinance to establish density <br />transition requirements. Through their discussion and thought process, they resolved that the <br />intent of the Charter amendment is to protect those people that bought property thinking that the <br />property next to them would be developed consistent with their neighborhood. In summary, <br />density transitioning would be required for new residential developments .that result in'an <br />increase in density from existing, adjacent residential neighborhoods, with a Couple of <br />exceptions. The Planning Commission is of the opinion that it would not be reasonable to apply <br />density transition requirements to parcels that were already zoned for a higher density than single <br />family at the time the Charter amendment became affective (October 22, 1997). In addition, if a <br />proposed residential development requires changing the zoning of the proposed site from <br />Commercial or Industrial to Residential (R-l, R-2, R-3, MR, or PUD), the proposed development <br />should not be subject to density transitioning requirements because the residents adjacent to the <br />site were anticipating a more intense use than residential. At the conclusion of the October 16, <br />2000 meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to make the necessary modifications to <br />the draft ordinance based on their discussion. By informal discussion and no formal motion, they <br />also stated that the draft ordinance may be passed onto City Council with the caveat that the <br />Commissioners have not had the opportunity to see their final draft in print. City Council <br />conducted a public hearing and reviewed the proposed ordinance on October 24, 2000.' The City <br />Attorney advised that there have been significant changes to the draft ordinance since the last <br />public hearing by the Planning Commission. He stated that although the City Council conducted <br />a public hearing that evening, Section 9.03.05 of the City Code requires another public hearing to <br />be conducted specifically by the Planning Commission. It would not be appropriate for the City <br />Council to introduce this ordinance until the Planning Commission has conducted another public <br />hearing and made a formal recommendation. City Council directed staff to place the draft <br />ordinance on the November 64 Planning Commission agenda. The only comment that was made <br />at the Council level was that a couple of the Councilmembers did not agree with the wording that <br />the property being zoned from commercial or industrial being zoned to residential would be <br />exempt from density transitioning requirement, because they have heard many comments from <br />residents that they would prefer to live next to a commercial use over a high density residential <br />development. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik presented the Commission with a letter from Jon Aune <br />of Orrin Thompson Homes opposing the removal of the following language from the ordinance: <br />"Undeveloped property that is in a zoning district that permits commercial or industrial uses and <br />which undeveloped property is subsequently rezoned to any residential zone shall not be subject <br /> <br />Planning Commission/November 6, 2000 <br /> Page 11 of 21 <br /> <br />-17- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.