Laserfiche WebLink
Zi~merman, LaDue, Rendriksen and Shu~way. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />NOTE CIT~ COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br /> <br />~he Oommission noted the following: <br /> <br />1. Special City Oouncil meeting minutes dated August 13, 1985. <br /> <br />COMMISSION BUSINESS <br /> <br />Case%l'. Rec~uest For Metes And Bounds Subdivision? O~e 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 frc~ 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 />Motion by Cc~missioner Zimmerman and seconded by Commissioner Deemer to <br />recommend that Mr. Loucks proceed with a convenience plat and to not require <br />soil borings, percs and topographies; further, to r~d that a road <br />easement be provided for in the plat. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairman Peterson, Cc~missioners Deemer, <br />Zimmerman, LaDue, Hendriksen and Shu~way. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case %2.- Request For Conce_ut Review Of Street Extensions: Case Of North <br /> <br />Motion by Chairman Peterson and seconded by O0mmissioner De~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, Commissioners LaDue and ~-~er. <br />Voting No: Commissioners Zimmerman, Shuw~ay and Hendriksen. <br /> <br />Commission 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 Regarding Fence Regulations: <br /> <br />f~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 />