Laserfiche WebLink
I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Commission then reviewed letter from Mr. ~oe Sentryz to City 'of Ramsey dated <br />February 1, 1983 regarding Lot Variances in Oakridge Estates. <br /> <br />Mr. Clayton Berg then stated that if the Planning and Zoning Commission <br />does not approve of Mr. Sentryz' request to subdivided, Mr. Sentryz requests <br />that consideration be given to approving subdivision of Lot 20 only, for <br />the purpose of building a model home. <br /> <br />Commissioner Isakson stated, and Commission agreed, that there are no viable <br />reasons contained in Mr. Sentryz' letter of February 1, 1983 to warrant a <br />subdivision variance, that the City should not deviate from the Comprehensive <br />Plan, and allowing the subdivision of even one lot could set a precedence. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Dunn and seconded by Commissioner Deemer to recommend <br />that Ramsey City Council deny the request of Mr. Joe Sentryz of Oakridge <br />Construction to subdivide lots designated on the attached map from 2½ acres <br />to approximately 1¼ acres each, based on the following: <br /> <br />1. · The financial gain or loss'of an individual is not reason for variance. <br /> <br />That the requirements that were placed on this particular plat are the <br />requirements of the developer and not those of the City of Ramsey and <br />further that homes of lesser size'could be constructed on the subject <br />lots and still comply with City Code. <br /> <br />3. Subject request is in direct conflict with the Comprehensive Plan <br /> which has been approved by the City and Metro Council. <br /> <br />4. Approval of this reqUest could result in impaired property values of <br /> properties that have already been developed in the area. <br /> <br />Further, that the verbal request to subdivide Lot 20 in order to build a <br />model home, be denied so as not to set-a precedence. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: <br />Zimmerman, Isakson and LaDue. <br />Schneider. <br /> <br />Chairman Peterson, Commissioners Dunn, Deemer, <br />Voting No: None.. Absent: Commissioner <br /> <br />Case #2: Request For Special Meeting; Case Of Group W Cable: <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Deemer and seconded by Commissioner Isakson to conduct <br />a Special Meeting and Public Hearing by the Planning and~Zoning Commission <br />on February 15, 1983 regarding a conditional use permit for Group W Cable. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: <br />Zimmerman, Isakson and LaDue. <br />Schneider. <br /> <br />Chairman Peterson, Commissioners Dunn, Deemer, <br />Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioner <br /> <br />Case #3: R.equest For Sketch Plan Approval; Case Of A1Sorteberg; <br /> <br />Planning Commission reviewed letter from City Engineer Raatikka to Mro <br />Kenneth Peterson, P & Z, dated January 31, 1983 regarding Sketch Plan Review <br />for Mr. A1 Sorteberg. <br /> <br />Mr. Clayton Berg stated that it is not a part of City ordinance, but at one <br />point in time there was serious consideration given to not requiring <br /> <br />P & Z/February 1, 1983 <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br /> <br />