Laserfiche WebLink
I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />yard setback on Lots 11, 20 and 35, in order that the sight line for the respective homes would be <br />consistent with the homes on the straight-away. The purchase price of the property included the <br />$825 per lot park dedication fee. Ms. Frolik explained that State Statutes require cities to take <br />action on land use applications within 60 days of the date of application. This rule also provides <br />the opportunity for cities to invoke a 60-day extension of that time frame for good cause. The <br />deadline for taking action on this request is April I0, 1997. She reported that City staff and the <br />Planning Commission recommend preliminary plat approval contingent upon compliance with <br />the review letter and resolving the zoning issue. However, if Council is not inclined to grant <br />preliminary plat approval contingent upon proper zoning, then the City should invoke the 60-day <br />extension to the decision-making time frame set by State Statute. <br /> <br />Jim Struwve, 15328 Hematite Street NW, Ramsey, expressed concern about traffic on 153rd. He <br />felt the road is dangerous as there as already been one fatality there. There will not be a lot of <br />traffic generated by only 38 homes, however, the park will bring in more people. He was <br />especially concerned about the speed limit being 55 miles per hour. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued relating to the fact that the City really cannot set the speed limit but that a <br />speed study could be requested. Mr. Jankowski felt that land use can affect the speed at which <br />people travel on a certain road. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Beahen and seconded by Councilmember Haas Steffen to approve <br />the preliminary plat for Alpine Estates, contingent upon compliance with the City Staff Review <br />Letter dated March 21, 1997, and the appropriate zoning. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councitmembers Beahen, Haas Steffen, Beyer and <br />Zimmerman. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #3: <br /> <br />Implementation of Chapter 8 of the Charter <br /> <br />City Administrator Schroeder stated that at the meetings of October 22, I996, November 12, <br />1996, and December 10, 1996, Council discussed adopting an ordinance implementing the <br />specifics of the terms of the referendum adopted Chapter 8 of the Ramsey Charter. A resolution <br />had been before Council which would levy a utility charge against three households within the <br />community which have access to municipal utilities but which have exercised their options under <br />Chapter 8. This charge created a significant amount of confusion as residents were thinking they <br />'would be subject to the charge, even though it affected only three properties, therefore, staff is <br />recommending that the proposed charge be dropped. Mr. Schroeder explained that the original <br />ordinance draft required connection to municipal utilities upon sale or transfer of title. Staff is <br />recommending that this also be dropped. What is included in the new draft is a definition section <br />which attempts to define functional and non-functional systems and the ability to repair a system <br />and the City's responsibility to notify the public of property not assessed because the property <br />owner elected to remain on a functional private sewer and/or water system. Staff is asking for a <br />motion to introduce this draft ordinance as is or to give advice as to Council's concerns and staff <br />will attempt to visit these concerns. <br /> <br />City Council/April 8, 1997 <br />Page 13 of 19 <br /> <br /> <br />