My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
01/31/2002
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Chapter 9 Committee
>
Minutes
>
2002
>
01/31/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2025 1:33:08 PM
Creation date
4/26/2024 10:43:46 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
Chairperson Nixt noted that what staff is proposing is removing the Planning Commission from <br />the administrative appeals process only. <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon noted that the Board of Adjustment would still handle variances. <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he did not have a problem with administrative issues <br />coming straight to the City Council, but he wanted to make sure that there was an appeal process <br />for decisions made by the Board of Adjustment. <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon replied that he would make sure that it states that the Board of <br />Adjustment process will remain the same other than handling the administrative appeal process. <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he would also like there to be the ability for someone to <br />appeal a yes decision made by the Board of Adjustment. <br />Chairperson Nixt inquired if that was currently allowed. <br />Mr. Gordon replied that that issue might be addressed in another area. <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon noted that staff would make sure they are not deleting Subdivision 6 if <br />it eliminates the Board of Adjustment appeal process. <br />Mr. Gordon reviewed the changes made to Subd. 2. Regulations. <br />Chairperson Nixt stated that section 9.03.11(2)(f) is referring to the run down structure and <br />section 9.03.11(12)(j) is referring to fire, storm damage. He questioned why would they want to <br />use construction replacement cost for an old building and use fair market value in section <br />9.03.11(12)(j ). He felt that the standards should be the same for both areas. <br />Mr. Gordon noted that there are other sections of City Code where the same issue will be <br />discussed and for that reason he suggested leaving the wording as is until those other areas can be <br />reviewed. <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that in terms of a zoning request he would like City Code to <br />state that if a request is not approved in 60-days the request is considered denied. In his opinion <br />failure to approve does not mean denial. He also requested that they articulate the procedure for <br />land use changes as it relates to zoning because presently they don't seem to be following any <br />formal procedure. <br />Mr. Gordon replied that he would research those issues and report back. <br />The Chapter 9 Committee scheduled the following meeting dates: <br />February 20, 2002 6:30 p.m. <br />Chapter 9 Committee/January 31, 2002 <br />Page 10 of 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.