My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council Work Session - 10/15/2001
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council Work Session
>
2001
>
Minutes - Council Work Session - 10/15/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 1:31:17 PM
Creation date
5/15/2003 9:09:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
10/15/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Councilmember Hendriksen recommended that the topographical features be defined. He <br />suggested including a definition section within the ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Bakken recommended having the City Planner review the issue and define what vacant <br />topographical features would be. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson recommended adding streams and creeks in Subdivision 3.a.3. <br /> <br />Councihnember Hendriksen inquired if Subd2.2b2 is being removed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that requiring the most restrictive setback and screening seems <br />extreme. <br /> <br />Councihnember Hendriksen stated that it only applies if there is an existing residential use with <br />significantly higher density. The setback restrictions would apply not the density transitioning. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak replied that as it reads currently they would be required to have the most <br />restrictive setbacks and screening. They would be asking single family residential to have the <br />same screening as high density residential because the property was rezoned. She did not think <br />the language should be taken out. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that they have had people in cases where <br />commercial/industrial was being proposed to be rezoned to residential, request that the rezoning <br />not occur. Some people feel commercial is better than high density residential. What they are <br />saying is that they will get the residential use with no density transitioning and the greater of the <br />two setback requirements. What he is saying is that the greater of the three should be required. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated that if a Council decides a zoning should be changed then they should be <br />taking into all the considerations of that rezoning. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that if the City changes someone's zoning from <br />commercial/industrial to residential, they are reducing the value and taking away their ability to <br />do what they wanted with their property. When a land use is being changed the City should not <br />be taking away the landowners right to use the property to its highest and best use. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson stated that there is a difference if the developer comes in and makes <br />the request or if it is the City that changes the zoning. Who initiates the rezoning is the <br />difference. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he wants the document to be a protection that everyone <br />can count on, but if it was the only issue disagreed on then he could agree to it. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that if the City is initiating the change then the language should <br />apply, and if the property owner makes the change then maybe the language should not apply. <br /> <br />City Council/October 15, 2001 <br /> Page 9 of 10 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.