Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Anderson stated that the problem with density transitioning is blending things <br />together. In some instances screening might be the best they can do and yet in other areas a <br />linear park might be more appropriate. She did not know that there was any one way to <br />accomplish the transitioning. She would like to see some transitioning visually that looks nice <br />for the City, not only to protect the old resident from the new residents. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that zoning laws are put into place to protect a person's <br />investment and if someone is in the middle of a 2.5-acre lot and then ¼-acre lots are permitted <br />next to the property, he felt that there should be something to protect a person's investment. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson stated that the person sitting on the 2.5-acre lot has the chance of <br />making a substantial amount of money by subdividing their property and should be given the <br />right to do so if they choose. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen replied that everyone has a certain amount of rights, but they are not <br />infinite. If there is a change that is significant then the City needs to mitigate that change. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated that there are decisions the Council has to make and density transition is <br />one of them. The language provided allows for some guidelines. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen replied that all a developer has to do is go to court and then the <br />Council bas no control. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that she could agree with the language presented. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he couldn't agree with the language as presented. <br /> <br />Mr. Bakken stated that it was time for the Council to decide where they want to be on the issue. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he does not think the language provides density <br />transitioning as he defines it. The ordinance does not require transitioning on property that was <br />previously zoned industrial and yet many residents would prefer to have industrial next to them <br />rather than high density residential. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that when there is an MSA road going through a development it <br />would make sense to have the higher density along that road instead of in the interior of the <br />development. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen replied that he agreed with that. He stated that he did not think that <br />buffering was density transitioning because it can all be removed by the property owner. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson replied that in ready-made situations it may be the best they can do. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman inquired as to what existing topographical features would be that <br />would not be included as existing vegetation. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec replied hills, berms etc. <br /> <br />City Council/October 15, 2001 <br /> Page 8 of 10 <br /> <br /> <br />