Laserfiche WebLink
Zimmerman, LaDue, Hendriksen and Shu~way. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />NOT~ CIT~ COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br /> <br />The Commission noted the foll~ing: <br /> <br />1. Special City Oouncil meeting minutes dated August 13, 1985. <br /> <br />OOMMISSION BUSINESS <br /> <br />Request For Metes And Bounds Subdivision: Case .Of Mr. William <br /> <br />Mr. Lester Carlson was present representing Mr. Loucks. Mr. Loucks is <br />requesting a metes and bounds subdivision of 6 acres fr~ his 80 acre parcel to <br />give to his daughter and grandson; a legal description of this parcel was <br />drafted in 1983. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding a road easement being provided to the east and the <br />City not looking favorably upon metes and bounds subdivisions. <br /> <br />~otion by Commissioner Zimmerman and seconded by Cc~missioner Deemer to <br />recon~end that Mr. Loucks proceed with a convenience plat and to not require <br />soil borings, percs and topograI~hies; further, to recommend that a road <br />easement be provided for in the plat. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairman Peterson, Cc~missioners ~-~er, <br />Zimmerman, LaDue, Hendriksen and Shu~way. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />~ Request For Concept Review Of $~reet Extensions: Q~se Of North <br /> <br />Motion by Chairman Peterson and seconded by O~mmissioner Dee~er to accept the <br />concept of 153rd alignment in Northfork P.U.D.; further, this motion does not <br />mean acceptance of lot configurations, accesses or cul-de-sacs. <br /> <br />Motion failed. Voting Yes: Chairman Peterson, O0mmissioners LaDue and Deemer. <br />Voting No: Ccm~issioners Zimmerman, Shu~way and Hendriksen. <br /> <br />Co~mission consensus is that they are uncomfortable with the proposed accesses <br />onto an MSA road; it is inconsistent with what has been approved in the past. <br /> <br />Case #3: Discussion Reg_arding Fence Reg~lations~ <br /> <br />(k~ission consensus is to remain with what has been written into Ramsey's <br />recodification of ordinances adding a clause regarding not obstructing traffic <br />visibility. ~ <br /> <br />Case ~: Discussion Regarding Draft Of Recodified Zoning Ordinance: <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding non-conforming and grandfathering; Mr. Goodrich <br />stated that the City cannot limit transferability. <br /> <br />September 3, 1985 <br /> <br />Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br /> <br />