My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 08/05/2004
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2004
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 08/05/2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 3:57:55 PM
Creation date
9/28/2004 3:12:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
08/05/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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
Commissioner Van Scoy stated the description of the Rural Development District in the <br />Comprchensive Plan says they would like to see 1 in 10, but that would not be achievable so they <br />wanted to go with I in 2 %. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer stated when the Planning Commission held the joint worksession with the <br />City Council one of the things on the table was the need to build in public involvement, <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon indicated this process is being mixed up <br />with the comprehensive plan process. The Comprehensive Plan process has not even really <br />begun. There will be a meeting in September to get a feel as to what people want to see, but this <br />discussion is scparate from that. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt noted an ordinance cannot deviate from the Comprehensive Plan. The question <br />is where they provide for the clustering. If the Comprehensive Plan says one house per 2 ½ acres <br />how do they get to the clustering concept <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Trudgeon replied the density is not being changed. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt commented this concept was discussed at length during the Comprehensive <br />Plan process. It was incorporated into the comprehensive plan as to whether this is appropriate <br />to implement and when. <br /> <br />Ms. Sitz stated if this concept got into the Comprehensive Plan that was long after the public <br />involvement process, which was strong for higher diversity and keeping larger lots. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt clarified Ms. Sitz's objections are that even phasing this in this manner is <br />inconsistent with her view of the 1 in 2 ½ acre density, in that it effectively creates a higher <br />density environment in contradiction of her view of what a 1 in 2 ½ should be. <br /> <br />Ms. Sitz stated her major opposition is the fact that there has not been adequate public <br />involvement and this is a major change in the concept of what the City looks like. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon stated he disagrees with that. <br /> <br />Ms. Sitz stated she has her personal feelings of how she looks at this and what she would prefer, <br />but there are a lot of other people that would like to give their opinions also. <br /> <br />Mr. 'Engstrmn commented in Elk River and other comlnunities when people do PUD's, the <br />people who do the development get a bone thrown at them from the city because the owner of <br />that land has a big hardship and spends extra money. There may be smaller lot sizes, but there <br />are other restrictions. They just cannot take the standard city ordinance and apply it to a PUD <br />because it is a different animal. <br /> <br />Cindy Norleen, 3470 108th Lane in Oak Grove, indicated she is a realtor representing Jerry <br />Sclhnan. She noted it appears that they are trying to cluster a coruer and leave the rest of the <br />area open. She asked if the other area will be able to be developed when water comes in. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/August 5, 2004 <br /> Page 35 of 40 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.