My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
10/03/89
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Planning and Zoning
>
Agendas
>
1980's
>
1989
>
10/03/89
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/22/2025 8:58:11 AM
Creation date
11/19/2003 9:34:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Planning and Zoning Commission
Document Date
10/03/1989
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.
/
255
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
Ramsey C~ty Planning Board <br /> <br />-3- <br /> <br />We are concerned that this section provides too <br />complicated and too costly requirements, so that <br />they will act as a deterrent to development, <br /> <br />It requires reports from hydrolog~sts, biologists, <br />botanists, soil scientists and other technical per- <br />sons, as well as a very costly survey. It requires <br />that all flora and fauna be identified and mapped <br />including identifying, describing and mapping <br />every tree. On some of our potential lots there <br />may be more than 100 trees. <br /> <br />Gentlemen, this section is unreasonable in its re- <br />quirements. Certainly you can devise an ordinance <br />which will accomplish your inten't and stitl facilitate <br />developmen_t, instead of making it so diffic~anc: <br />c~-stly. This section (with others) eliminat~s-~e <br />the possib~t~ of a sma.Il devdloper,or land owndr <br />'/~--~-oping the property, because of the heavy capi- <br />tal requirements. <br /> <br />,~~t~ma~t~o~' ~pproved ~u~¢eat <br /> <br /> form of <br /> <br /> as determined by the City <br /> <br />We have two concerns .relative to this provision: <br /> <br />a) <br /> <br />This is a E.ery costly requirement which, im con- <br />jmaction with the costly requirements discussed <br />above, discourage development, if not make it <br />unlikely.. I am told by City personnel that is is <br />not a typical provision for developmeht else- <br />where in the City. <br /> <br />b) T__h. is provision has no place bur~ed in this ordin- <br /> <br />an~B_r.e. It belongs in the City Subdivision Ordinance, <br />if it is to be anywhere. <br /> <br />1983 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.