Laserfiche WebLink
Chairperson Nixt questioned if the clustering should be done through a PUD to allow more <br />flexibility. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon replied it could be done through a PUD, <br />but he is not sure what else they would want to be flexible on. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt inquired about the calculations of land area requirements. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon replied clearer direction, is likely needed <br />as to how the density will be calculated with gross and net. This has been good discussion about <br />how they determine that. They should revisit that and be sure to be very clear on the <br />calculations. There is a difference between tot sizes and determining density. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt indicated the need to clarify exactly the r/et developable land. He explained <br />after determining the density allowance it must be converted from the gross to the net in some <br />process. He stated the. requirements concerning the homeowners association are vague in <br />relation to the rnaintenance and preservation of the private septic and well system. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Jeffrey, seconded by Chairperson Nixt, to close the public hearing. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Jeffrey, Brauer, Van Scoy and <br />Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioners Johnson and Shepherd. <br /> <br />The public hearing was closed at 11:47 p.m. <br /> <br />Commission Business <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission back to order at 11:47 <br />p.m. <br /> <br />Comlnissioner Van Sco'y indicated this is a solution to a problem that was posed to staff, and it <br />does not feel right to him as it creates conflict with the comprehensive plan. <br /> <br />Motion by Chairperson Nixt to recommend the City Council deny the adoption of the ordinance <br />to amend Chapter 9 (Zoning and Subdivision of Land) of the Ramsey City Code to amend <br />development standards in the R-1 Residential District as presented for the following reasons: <br /> · The ordinance tails to adequately address the appropriate means of calculating the net <br /> land area required for the cluster development. <br /> The provision relative to the required homeowners association lacks specificity and detail <br /> in respect to maintenance and inspection of the private system serving the cluster. <br /> · The ordinance contemplates a cost associated with the establishment of the private <br /> service that may be cost prohibitive. <br /> · The ordinance does not appear to comply with the intent of the comprehensive plan. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer stated some of the Commissioners are completely opposed to this. It does <br />not matter whether they change the language or other things; it is just a bad idea. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/Aagust 5, 2004 <br /> Page 38 of 40 <br /> <br /> <br />