My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 10/09/2001
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2001
>
Agenda - Council - 10/09/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 12:28:13 PM
Creation date
9/4/2003 3:10:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
10/09/2001
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.
/
252
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
,! <br /> <br />! <br />! <br /> <br /> Goodr/ch replied that the opinion the Council has received in regards ~:~e:, <br />City <br /> Attorney <br />effectiveness of the Charter amendment would also be the same for the traffic ~'~"~'"ti'~ffii!i~% <br />analysis. ~!i?" ~*~? <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik stated that she was not sure if they. ~ age <br />to City Code regarding the traffic generation analysis, but staff does fe ~ good ~llay. to <br />reqmre the analyas, s ~ '~; ?:!z:~::~ <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich reviewed the lan~age of ~e Cheer b~i':~'noted that the~?'~¢~% <br />City Council, t~ough legal reco~endatlons, found ~at valid under State <br />statues. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak noted that the property is <br /> <br />ement. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich explained that the City is under a <br />he reviewed. He noted that the City cannot place any density <br />exist as of May 15, 2000. <br /> <br /> 8, 2001, which <br />the property that did not <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen ' ;ouncil had passed a <br />prior to that date it would have <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that h~':'i~as not <br />issue. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurakstated that on the <br />and it was Court' 0rdered:iobe zoned as R-1 <br />under the R- 1' U Zoning. '~::.~ ~!';. <br /> <br />ordinance <br /> <br />have ruled on that <br /> <br /> the property was zoned R-IR <br />inquired what the lot size requirements were <br /> <br />Community Development FrOl:ik replied that size would be 10,800 square feet. <br /> <br />Councdmember Kur. al~ stated'that::they- as :a Councd. cannot change that minimum requirement <br />because density transitioning is not pern~ed on this parcel because of the Court order. <br /> <br />C'ity Attorney GoodriCh/' ~epti??.ihat was correct. <br /> ' .':i ..... <br /> <br />Councilmeml~er. Hendriksen~ anquired if in the 1995 Comprehensive Plan doesn't it permit <br />platting in thel~'l U district to be one acre lots. <br /> <br />Community D~,v. elopment Director Frolik replied that it is City Code that the lot size is a <br />minimum of one acre without City sewer and water under the R-1U zoning regulations. <br /> <br />ccmncilmember Hendriksen stated that the developer could chose to plat anything above the <br />minimum and they can make lots of one acre in size without sewer and water. <br /> <br />City Council/September 11, 2001 <br /> Page 9 of 22 <br /> <br />-27- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.