My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 02/26/2002
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
2002
>
Minutes - Council - 02/26/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 11:18:22 AM
Creation date
5/6/2003 10:50:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
02/26/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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
Julie Horn, 6031 145t~' Lane NW, Ramsey, stated that she would like to work with the family, but <br />she also felt there needed to be a round table discussion of people from each area of the existing <br />neighborhoods. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated that if too many people get involved, then things do not get resolved. He <br />stated that he would like to see a couple people be representatives for the neighborhood to meet <br />with the developer. <br /> <br />Ms. Horn inquired as to why the issue came this far without a plan. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec replied that it was the procedure they were told to follow. <br /> <br />Ms. Horn stated that Section 9.03.02 states that the City should have had a plan to look at and the <br />proper fees should have been paid. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the Council is considering 14 amendments to the <br />Comprehensive Plan and the City did not follow the proper procedures and collect the <br />appropriate fees for those amendments. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson requested that the Community Development Department explain why <br />they handled the amendments as they did. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik explained that there were 14 proposed changes to the <br />Comprehensive Plan that spun off from the public hearing last June and the process was started <br />through the Planning Commission. In December, the Council adopted a Comprehensive Plan <br />before seeing the recommendation and a legal opinion from Kennedy and Graven, and it was <br />suggested that the requests be considered as formal requests. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that, when the City receives and accepts a written application, it <br />allows the applicant to have certain property rights. If they did not want to do that, the <br />application should have been rejected. Once the City takes the application it is not fair to stop <br />the process, which is why they are in the position without fees being paid. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson stated that in the future, the fees should be charged, but the decision <br />not to collect the fees was a decision made at the administrative level and was done in good faith. <br /> <br />Ms. Horn stated that City Code also states that the application will not be accepted without a plan <br />or the fees. There were 125 people that signed a petition against the development, so she does <br />not want to be the only representation working with the developer. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen recommended that they table action and direct staff to draft findings <br />of fact in the negative and positive. If the property owner wants to reapply, then they should do <br />so appropriately. <br /> <br />City Council/February 26, 2002 <br /> Page 21 of 35 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.