Laserfiche WebLink
establish density transition requirements. Through their discussion and thought process, they <br />resolved that the intent of' the Charter amendment is to protect those people that bough property <br />thinking that the property next to them would be developed consistent with their neighborhood. <br />In sumrnary, density transitioning would be required for new residential developments that result <br />in an 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 of the Charter amendment became effective (October 22, 1997). In addition, if <br />a proposed residential development requires changing the zoning of the proposed site fi'om <br />Commercial or Industrial to Residential (R-I, 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 Plmming 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 staff met with <br />the City Attorney to discuss the ordinance format and procedures. It has been determined that <br />there have been significant changes to the draft-ordinance since the last public hearing. The City <br />Attorney has advised that, although the City Council is conducting a public hearing on the <br />Ordinance, Section 9.03.05 of the City Code requires another public hearing to be conducted <br />specifically by the Planning Commission. It would not be approphate for the City Council to <br />introduce the ordinance until the Planning Commission has conducted another public hem'ing and <br />then make a formal recommendation. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />Ben Deemer, 14501 Sunfish Lake Boulevard NW, Ramsey, read the following: "I am here <br />tonight to state my concerns about the draft density transition ordinance that is in process. I have <br />submitted a letter of concern on September 1, 2000, and would like that entered to the public <br />hearing minutes tonight. I am also speaking fi'om the hip so to speak, as I did not have access to <br />the current draft of the ordinance when I was organizing this little speech. My very first Concern <br />is the protection of properties that were zoned for multiple families before the Charter <br />amendment that has instigated this ordinance was passed. I know of six properties that were <br />legally zoned R-3, that should be covered. I own two of them. There is one other adjacent to my <br />parcels, that along with mine has been paying or paid for the assessments of sewer and water <br />which was installed in 1993. I had started to develop the properties in 1996, and had financing <br />and a development company at the table when the development moratorium was put on in 1997, <br />which prevented any progress and drove the developer fi'om the project, along with the financing. <br />I would certainly be very upset if these properties were not protected fi'om the new transitioning <br />ordinance is some manner. The draft of the ordinance started out with a statement of purpose, to <br />control the urbm~rural transitioning area, and then in the very first section went on to regulate <br />urban to urban transiti.oning. This is stretching the intent of the Charter amendment. There was <br />a pervious moratorium in this City that was in place in 1977-1978, and established what was then <br />k2~own as the 1990 urban area, which was the first step toward having municipal sewer services. <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />-44- <br /> <br />city coun-cil)october 24, 2000 .................... <br /> Page 8 of 31 <br /> <br /> <br />