My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 08/23/1983
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
1983
>
Agenda - Council - 08/23/1983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 12:00:41 PM
Creation date
4/21/2004 9:42:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
08/23/1983
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.
/
413
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
I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Ramsey City Planning Board <br /> <br /> ', <br /> <br />-2- <br /> <br />August 2, 1983 <br /> <br />For the most part, the ordinance appears to set forth a reasonable <br />system of regulations to accomplish its expressed intent, however <br />we do have some concerns which have been stated hereafter: <br /> <br />Section 170,011SD (c) states <br /> a) '~Development shall be conducted so that the <br /> <br />rnaximtun number of trees are preserved by <br />the locating of structures in existint cleared <br />areas and natural clearings . . ." <br /> <br />We are concerned that the size and number of <br />river frontage lots not be determined by the num- <br />ber of available clearings, because reasonable <br />value will be achieved only if lots can be platted <br />in an orderly manner at the frontage allowed by <br />'the ordinance. If the number of lots is limited to <br />the number of available clearings, the number of <br />potential lots may be substantially reduced result- <br />ing in substantial money loss to land owners. <br /> <br />b) <br /> <br />"When trees are removed, the permitee will re- <br />store the density of trees, utilizing nursery stocks <br />of a minimum o£ 1-3/4" diameter measured one <br /> <br />foot above the ground .... provided that in no <br />case need the density exceed 10 trees per acre. <br /> <br />Development shall not reduce the existin§ crown , <br /> <br />cover greater than 500'/0 .... " <br /> <br />We are concerned as to which of these provisions <br />controls the other; the ordinance should either: <br /> <br />'!in no case need density exceed 10 trees <br />per acre" or <br /> <br />"Development shah not reduce the existing <br />crown cover greater than 50.0% . . ." <br /> <br />We are concerned because some of our acreage is <br />quite wooded with smaller trees, a substantial <br />amount of which need to be cleared to make <br />decent lots. <br /> <br />We are also concerned, that the ordinance should <br />not require the replanting of any trees which need <br />to be removed'because of serious storm damage, <br />disease or other acts of God. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.