My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 02/02/2006
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2006
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 02/02/2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 3:51:24 PM
Creation date
3/9/2006 9:44:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
02/02/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
make this work for everyone, and do not want to be the enemy. He encouraged the neighbors to <br />bring up issues, and if they can address them, they will. <br /> <br />Vice Chairperson Johnson noted that when looking at a Comprehensive Plan review change, <br />there should be some compelling reason to change it. He stated that the only reason he has heard <br />is that close to the road there is a problem having single-family homes, and the developer wants <br />to have more of a buffer. He indicated that in his mind that is not enough reason, since that is the <br />case all along County Road 5. He stated he would need a better reason to recommend the <br />change. <br /> <br />Motion by Vice Chairperson Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Brauer to close the public <br />hearing at 9:20 p.m. <br /> <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Vice Chairperson Johnson, Commissioners Brauer, Cleveland, <br />Shepherd, and Van Scoy. Voting No: None. Absent: Chairperson Nixt, and Commissioner <br />Levine. <br /> <br />Case #5: <br /> <br />Request for Sketch Plan Review of Skyline Pointe; Case of MN Skyline <br />Partners, LLC <br /> <br />Commission Input <br /> <br />Commissioner Van Scoy indicated that the proposal that they have looks like a nice <br />development, and he appreciates the work put into it. He seconded Vice Chairperson Johnson's <br />comment on a compelling reason to change the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that he is <br />thinking there may be a way to blend the two concepts. He indicated that he does like the <br />interconnected walkways, but is having a hard time seeing this type of development going into <br />this area. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer commented that he needed to abstain from these two cases because of his <br />potential involvement in the school board. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cleveland stated that she also has concerns about the number of cards, but she <br />understands the concerns of trying to put single-family homes in this location. She indicated she <br />likes the concept, but the other concern is where construction trucks will be coming through <br />during the construction phase. <br /> <br />Mr. Hillard stated that during construction they could use the existing driveways to access the <br />site. He mentioned that many of these home owners will be empty nesters, or young <br />professionals, and there will not necessarily be a lot of children walking to school. <br /> <br />Vice Chairperson Johnson stated that the lay out works for him, but he would encourage the <br />applicant to go back and see how they can make single-family work. <br /> <br />Vice Chairperson dohnson called a brief recess at 9:24p. m. The meeting resumed at 9:35p. m. <br /> <br />· Planning Commission/February 2, 2006 <br /> Page 14of21 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.