Laserfiche WebLink
City Attorney Goodrich inquired if it was Mr. gittner's position that under a planned unit <br />development there would be better conservation in the area. <br /> <br />Mr. Bittner replied that through the planned unit development process they might achieve better <br />conservation. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich inquired if Mr. Bittner felt that under the planned unit development <br />process the density would be less. <br /> <br />Mt'. Bittner replied that as he would understand the proposed development, the density would be <br />4.2 units per acre and the Comprehensive Plan requires a density of 4.0 units per acre. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich inquired if the density being proposed to the Council is different fi'om <br />what was proposed to the Planning Commission January 3. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon replied yes, explaining that the apartment complex had been <br />removed from the plat until a future date. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich inquired if Mr. Bittner was not concerned with density as it relates to the <br />planned unit development process. <br /> <br />Mr. Bittner replied that he could not speak for the group of residents, but noted that what they are <br />trying to do is understand the language that is included in the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />Councihnember Hendriksen inquired if the language was included in the Comprehensive Plan <br />that states that a developer is not guaranteed to achieve the maximum allowed density. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon replied that he was not sure where that language was included <br />without researching it. <br /> <br />Councihnember Hendriksen reviewed other points included under the Urban Residential Policy <br />on page V~19 of the Comprehensive Plan that would suggest that just because the land use <br />permits a certain density, that density is not guaranteed. He stated that he did not agree with the <br />scare tactic that just because the development is done as a planned unit development there will be <br />a higher density. <br /> <br />Mr. McDilda stated that part of the reason the residents would be in favor of the planned unit <br />development process is because it would split the development into three different areas and let <br />theln look at each section separately. Looking at one development is not what the intent is <br />behind the Comprehensive Plan. He also noted that he took offense to the City Attorney putting <br />a Ramsey resident through a grilling session. He did not believe that was the appropriate forum. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that he was trying to find out the facts and hear what the actual <br />concerrls are. <br /> <br />City Council/February 12, 2002 <br /> Page 11 of 33 <br /> <br /> <br />