Minutes - Council - 05/26/2020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

and 55-foot-wide lots. He stated that the developer stated that they submitted a plan with 80-foot lots but stated that perhaps the developer should provide feedback on their intent in submitting that plan. He noted that the statement was made that the layout could be completed but not whether the applicant would move forward with that plan. Mr. Schmidt stated that the concept plan showing 80 foot lots was meant to show that 327 of those lots could fit on the property but noted that he would not want to move forward with that plan. He stated that they are attempting to create housing that is affordable, which are houses that normal people can buy. He noted that infrastructure costs are highly related to the sale price, noting the difference between 80-foot lots and 55-foot lots. He stated that the driving force behind his proposal is the desire to provide housing choices. He stated that the market has shown that people would prefer smaller lots. He stated that while the 80-foot lot plan shows that the lots can fit, it would not be economically feasible. Acting Mayor Riley stated that there are 55, 65, and 75 foot lots proposed in this sketch plan for a property zoned for 80-foot lots. Councilmember Musgrove asked if the City is working under the 2030 plan or the draft 2040 plan. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that there is no change between the two drafts for this parcel. Councilmember Musgrove referenced the chart showing the proposed lots, allowed lots and the difference, and asked for clarification. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that was an attempt to determine what the parcel would look like with 80 foot lots on the same road layout submitted by the developer. He stated that since then the developer has shown a different layout to maximize development using 80-foot lots. Councilmember Musgrove stated that she has heard a lot about why residents moved to Ramsey and this area in particular, noting that the rural character brought them to this choice. She commented that Ramsey does provide a product of lower priced homes, just not in this same rural area. She stated that she would not support the rezoning request and would prefer to see 80 foot lots in this area. Motion by Councilmember Specht seconded by Councilmember Heinrich, to deny Ordinance #20- 07 Approving a Zoning Amendment for the Makowsky Property and. Further discussion: Deputy City Administrator Gladhill read aloud statements submitted by Jake and John Packer, the brokers for the property owners that ask that the owners property rights and housing market be taken into consideration and that the park would be an amenity to the development and surrounding area. Acting Mayor Riley stated that just because there is a demand in the market, does not mean that product has to go on that site. Councilmember Kuzma stated that while he understands the resident wishes about not wanting development, the property owner has rights as well and a willing developer. He commented that he would prefer that this go back to the Planning Commission with staff continuing to work with the developer to find a solution. City Council / May 26, 2020 Page 13 of 16