Laserfiche WebLink
Motion by Councilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Hardin to adopt <br />Resolution #92-12-321 adopting the Community Service Award Program. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gilbertson, Councilmembers Peterson, Hardin, Beyer <br />and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Hardin to direct <br />Parks/Utilities Coordinator Boos to invite the volunteers to the January 26, 1993 City <br />Council meeting to receive their Community Service Award certificates. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gilbertson, Councilmembers Peterson, Hardin, Beyer <br />and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #4: Introduce Ordinance to Amend Chapter 9 of the Ramsey City <br /> Code, Sections 9.02, 9.21.23, 9.50.37, 9.50.50 and Section <br /> 9.50.57 <br /> <br />Zoning Administrator Frolik stated she presented this proposed ordinance for consideration <br />following amendments to different sections. Council tabled it for further review. She met <br />with Councilmember Hardin, discussed his concerns and fine-tuned the proposed <br />ordinance. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hardin asked that Section 9.21.23 B-3 Highway Business District, Subd. <br />2, Item "k" be amended to not include self service car washes. He also suggested that <br />Subdivision 3, item "b" and also item #15 of Subd. 4 be deleted to eliminate outdoor <br />storage. <br /> <br />Councilmember Peterson stated that people can request conditional use permits but Council <br />has the fight to deny them. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hardin stated he preferred to deal with outside storage in the B-3 District <br />on a case by case basis with a conditional use permit, if necessary, instead of allowing all <br />businesses to have it. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Hardin and seconded by Councilmember Peterson to introduce <br />Ordinance g92-XX amending Chapter 9, Sections 9.02, 9.21.23, 9.50.37, 9.50.50 and <br />9.50.57 and to include changes made tonight. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Councilmember Zimmerman stated he still believes the City has to <br />include the fight-of-way in the lot size. Ms. Frolik stated that City Code allows the <br />developer to include the fight-of-way when platting the lots but for Code enforcement, the <br />fight-of-way is not taken into consideration. Councilmember Beyer stated the City should <br />be consistent and include fight-of-way when computing a lot size for Code enforcement <br />purposes. Mr. Schroeder stated that if the lot of record shows the parcel to be 2.3 acres, is <br />an accessory structure then allowable because the property owner thought he purchased a <br />2.5 acre lot? Councilmember Hardin suggested dealing with this lot size discussion at a <br />January meeting. Ms. Frolik stated that if Council adopts this, it will prohibit developers <br />from including the road fight-of-way for meeting lot areas. Councilmember Hardin stated <br />that makes sense. Ms. Frolik stated that the problem she's'.run into is that all the plats in <br />the rural area are deficient of 2.5 because the developer was permitted to include the road <br />fight-of-way and those buyers who thought they had 2.5 acres do not qualify for a metal <br />accessory structure. Ms. Frolik stated that if Councilmembers Beyer and Zimmerman feel <br />owners of "so-called" 2.5 acre lots have not been treated fairly, the threshold for a metal <br /> <br />City Council/December 22, 1992 <br /> Page 6 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />