My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2017
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2017
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:27:24 AM
Creation date
3/14/2017 1:32:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
02/02/2017
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.
/
382
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
nonconforming structures, those structures are already protected under Minn. Stat. §§ 394.36 and <br />462.357, subd. le (2015). In addition, the proposed rules provide local governments with the option of <br />allowing nonconforming principal structures to expand laterally into required setbacks, consistent with <br />many local MRCCA ordinances. Proposed Minn. R. 6106.0080, subp. 3.C. Expansion of structures, <br />driveways and parking areas would also be subject to the vegetation management standards in <br />proposed Minn. R. 6106.0150, and to land alteration and storm water management standards in <br />proposed Minn. R. 6106.0160. Costs associated with these activities are not expected to differ <br />significantly from costs already incurred in applying for local permits. <br />Some impacts to businesses, including small development firms and builders, could occur in conjunction <br />with subdivision of land for residential development. The requirements for open space set -asides in <br />most MRCCA districts could result in additional costs for management of the open space and design and <br />construction of trails or other common amenities. However, these additional costs are typically offset by <br />lower costs for development of roads and installation of utilities, since more compact development <br />patterns equate to shorter roads and utility runs. Under most conservation design ordinances, density is <br />the same, or even higher, than under conventional development, so the development value of a parcel <br />is not diminished. Moreover, the presence of common open space, trails and other amenities can result <br />in increased property values over time. <br />List of Witnesses <br />If these rules go to a public hearing, as proposed, the department anticipates having the following <br />personnel involved in representing the DNR at the administrative hearing on the need for and <br />reasonableness of the rules: <br />Legal Counsel: Sherry A. Enzler <br />DNR General Counsel <br />Witnesses: <br />Julie Ekman Jennifer Shillcox <br />Manager, Conservation Supervisor <br />Assistance & Regulation Section Land Use Programs Unit <br />Dan Petrik Suzanne Rhees <br />Land Use Specialist Water Policy Consultant <br />21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.