My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 12/16/2003
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2003
>
Agenda - Council - 12/16/2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/24/2025 3:58:39 PM
Creation date
12/12/2003 3:34:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
12/16/2003
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.
/
239
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
number of employees allowed in the above chart." and that language be added to the ordinance <br />that would require a lot combination where this common ownership. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that there are a lot of the residents of Ramsey that work as <br />independent contractors that could easily do so on a much smaller parcel than ten acres. He <br />stated that the term "Independent Contractor" needed to be defined and allow for some of the <br />uses to occur on smaller lots. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich inquired if Councilmember Elvig agreed that all of the other uses <br />identified under Subd. 4d, other than independent contractors, should occur on ten acres. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig replied yes. He stated that perhaps some of the independent contractor <br />businesses should stay on ten acres, but the City should also allow for some other independent <br />contractor businesses on smaller acreage. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that .it would probably make more sense to remove the language <br />independent contractor. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that a machine shop with one person is very low key operation. If <br />a gentlemen is running a one-man shop on 4.5 or 5 acres on a county road it is not disruptive. <br />They need to try and accommodate situations that may already exist in the City. <br /> <br />Councihnember Cook stated that when you talk abOUt independent contractors you are talking <br />more about trades and there could be an electrician that has a couple of people working for them <br />with two vans that only leave in the morning and return in the evening. He thought the language <br />was much more restrictive than it needed to be. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik stated that since the number of employees allowed has <br />been reduced the need to require the 10 acres may no longer be there. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen stated that there may be some uses that may be noisy and more <br />intensive that they should consider only occurring on large parcels, but someone who does <br />graphic arts or material decorating she did not think would require a ten acre parcel. <br /> <br />Councihnember Elvig stated that he realizes that it is very difficult language to write, but the <br />City needs language in place to say no to a home occupation permit if they need to. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that her biggest concern is that she does not want to deny people <br />the use o£their property. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that many people start in their garage and flourish their businesses, <br />which is the American way, and the City should nurture that. That being said they need to have <br />the ability to restrict a use if it is a nuisance in a neighborhood. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman noted that he thought staff did a very good job on subdivision 4 e <br />and g. <br /> <br />City Council/November 25, 2003 <br /> Page 12 of 28 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.