My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 03/30/1999 - Special
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
1999
>
Minutes - Council - 03/30/1999 - Special
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 4:07:05 PM
Creation date
5/29/2003 3:05:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Title
Special
Document Date
03/30/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
Motion by Councilmember Haas Steffen and seconded by Councilmember Hendriksen to <br />include a bridge or roadway in the quasi-public use. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Haas Steffen, Hendriksen, <br />Anderson and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated we only changed the language for that quasi-public <br />designation, not for that corridor. <br /> <br />Councilmember Haas Steffen stated that would not be a good idea right now. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated we differ. He felt the way we should proclaim this is <br />where we want to see a bridge. <br /> <br />Councilmember Haas Steffen stated the County did a 2015 and we have asked them to <br />amend it. <br /> <br />Councihnember Zimmerman stated that on a lot of our maps, we have seen the extension <br />of #116 as hooking up to Highway #10 eventually but not at the bridge corridor. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec felt that was a technical thing. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman stated we know that, but what about in five years? <br /> <br />Councilmember Haas Steffen stated that we just sent a letter to the County. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen said maybe we will have that letter by the time we meet <br />again on this plan. <br /> <br />Councihnember Hendriksen referred to V~19 - Urban rural transition - more protection <br />there than in mixed residential. If it is only single-family housing on those lots, they do <br />not need a PUD. He was not certain that is adequate. He asked what the opposition <br />would be to designating that to transitional. He stated that he brought this up on <br />November 17 as one of the areas that meet the criteria. He asked why we don't want to <br />do that. <br /> <br />Ms. Sherman stated there are some other limiting factors in the area. She noted the white <br />area as not being served with services. <br /> <br />Councihnember Hendriksen asked if this is designated as urban rural transition, can we <br />keep the same density to which Ms. Sherman replied she did not think so. We will <br />achieve higher density if it is urban transitional - five units per acre. <br /> <br />Motion by Mayor Gamec and seconded by Councilmember Haas Steffen stating they see <br />no problem with leaving it how it is - undesignated. <br /> <br />Special City Council/March 30, 1999 <br /> Page 9 of 15 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.