Agenda - Council Work Session - 11/30/2004

Home

Commissioner Van Scoy stated the description of the Rural Development District in the Comprehensive Plan says they would like to see 1 in 10, but that would not be achievable so they wanted to go with I in 2 ½. Commissioner Brauer stated when the Planning Commission held the joint worksession with the City Council one of the things on the table was the need to build in public involvement, Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon.indicated this process is being mixed up with the comprehensive plan process. The Comprehensive Plan process has not even 'really begun. Yhere will be a meeting in September to get a feel as to what people want to see, but this discussion is separate from that. Chairperson Nixt noted an ordinance cannot deviate from the Comprehensive Plan. The question is where they provide [bt the clustering, l[f the Comprehensive Plan says one house per 2 ½ acres how do they get to the clustering concept Assistant Community Development Trudgeon replied the density is not being changed. Chairperson Nixt commented this concept was discussed at length during the Comprehensive Plan process. It was incorporated into the comprehensive plan as to whether this is appropriate to implement and when. Ms. Sitz stated if this concept got into the Comprehensive Plan that was long after the public involvement process, which was strong for higher diversity and keeping larger lots. Chairperson Nixt clarified Ms. Sitz's objections are that even phasing this in this manner is inconsistent with her view of the 1 in 2 ½ acre density, in that it effectively creates a higher density environment in contradiction of her view of what a 1 in 2 ½ should be. Ms. Sitz statecl her major opposition is the fact that there has not been adequate public involvement and this is a major change in the concept of what the City looks like. Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon stated he disagrees with that. Ms. Sitz stated she has her personal feelings of how she looks at this and what she would prefer, but there are a lot of other people that would like to give their opinions also. Mi'. Engstrom commented in Elk River and other communities when people do PUD's, the people who do the development get a bone thrown at them from the city because the owner of that land has a big hardship and spends extra money. There may be smaller lot sizes, but there are other restrictions. They just cannot take the standard city ordinance and apply it to a PUD because it is a different animal. Cindy 'Norlecn, 3470 108th Lane in Oak Grove, indicated she is a realtor representing Jen'y Sellman. She noted it appears that they are trying to cluster a corner and leave the rest o~' the area open. She asked if the other area will be able to be developed when water comes in. Planning Commission/August 5, 2004 Page 35 of 40