My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 03/22/2005
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
2005
>
Minutes - Council - 03/22/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/24/2025 1:44:32 PM
Creation date
4/28/2005 7:36:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
03/22/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
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
Mayor of the City of Ramsey, Council members, City staff, and concerned citizens... <br /> <br />I will try to be brief. This project differs from others the city has faced. There was a <br />divided planning commission vote to disapprove. Land contamination is an unknown <br />and unresolved issue. The scope of change is great, city-wide, as to the sewer and water <br />changes being petitioned for. <br /> <br />I want to talk as a neighbor in Traprock Commons, where covenants exist against <br />subdivision of our five acre lots, and we like it that way. We moved here liking it, and <br />we hope to continue to enjoy things as they are. We built our own home board by board, <br />shingle by shingle. <br /> <br />This out of character growth for the neighborhood, takes away value, from our properties. <br />It lessens our enjoyment of our own lands and seeks to set aside sound existing zoning <br />designations, with insider sponsorship problems we could debate for hours. <br /> <br />Our private properties belong to us. We should suffer no implied condemnation or <br />degradation to value of our homesteads, absent a condemnation action in court, with the <br />only reason being a neighboring private property owner(s) wants to maximized <br />profitability. <br /> <br />And this is not a scheme for maximized profit as the land stands zoned. That would be a <br />sounder proposal, as it would not intrude into a large-lot neighborhood with <br />unnecessarily higher density. <br /> <br />This is a request to set aside the comprehensive plan for a large piece of raw land in a <br />way that will lessen neighborhood large-lot future protections as it now threatens our <br />covcnanted properties with potential unneeded forced hookup worries that will hang over <br />our properties and impact price if or when we sell. <br /> <br />Neither should this council be swayed by debatable claims of where the best interest of <br />the City stands, with one side saying stay the course, it is best, and the other saying, "My <br />profits are best." <br /> <br />Patti al value of each of our Traprock Commons properties will indirectly stand <br />condemned by plan amendment, not by judicial filing. <br /> <br />If this council approves the comprehensive plan amendment and Sweet Ridge <br />development planning as it exists today, it is absolutely wrong. Citizens all over the <br />United States are taking legal stands against developer influenced bodies of government <br />intent on forcing their will over the will of the residential property owner citizens. These <br />actions are un-just and un-American. <br /> <br />America was founded on the principles of individual rights, including the right to life, <br />liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. What do these rights mean if we as individuals are <br />not free to continue to enjoy the homesteads we chose to build our lives arotmd simply <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.