My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
01/05/88
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Planning and Zoning
>
Agendas
>
1980's
>
1988
>
01/05/88
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/21/2025 11:05:03 AM
Creation date
10/23/2006 2:44:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Planning & Zoning Commission
Document Date
01/05/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
179
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
<br />3. No direct or indirect assessments to Flintwood I caused <br />by Flintwood II (new development can and should pay its <br />own way). <br />4. No high speed through traffic.' <br /> <br />liAs you may recall. we negotiated in two meetings on the Flintwood II PUD <br />and agreed to allow a lower density housing than Mr. Carson proposed with <br />suitable buffer space under the following conditions: <br /> <br />I . Berm <br />2. Planted trees <br />3. A neighborhood association to maintain Flintwood II property. <br />4. Attractive. carriage style homes with beautiful landscaped yards. <br /> <br />Well, this developer and tbe City of Ramsey bave let us down. <br /> <br />I. We have no berm or any buffer zone. <br />2. Not one tree was planted in the buffer zone. <br />3. No assocaition was created to maintain property. <br />4. The homes built right next to our neighborhood are without <br />landscaping and are the smallest, cbeapest houses in the whole <br />Flintwood II development. Average price probably $30,000 - <br />$50,000 less than in Flintwood I. <br /> <br />Let me summarize by saying: <br /> <br />-t <br /> <br />I. I am disappointed and insulted that we are considering a plan to <br />put apartment buildings and office buildings right next to my yard <br />and my neighbors. Furthermore. I have lost confidence in this <br />developer to keep his promises and the City to look after my best <br />interests. <br /> <br />2. I specifically do not want the requested development on outlots M <br />N because of: <br /> <br />a. A serious reduction in my property value. <br />b. Loss of privacy and living quality. <br />c. Loss of all the trees in those lots when a large apartment, <br />garages and paved parking areas are put in. <br />d. Loss of night-time darkness caused by yard lights associated <br />with this type of development. <br />e. Loss of security due to high density/lOW cost housing. <br />f. Location not good for residents of apartments either. <br /> <br />In conclusion, I and my neighbors want this request for preliminary plat <br />approval for outlots M and N stopped dead in it's tracks. Based on earlier <br />experiences with Flintwood II, I offer no compromise position short of <br />either no development or a single family home similar in value, lot size <br />and similar in lot character to my own. <br /> <br />I would also like to invite this commission to my home for a personally <br />guided tour." <br /> <br />P & Z/Public RearingiDecember 1,1987 <br /> <br />Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br />.. ,-.., <br /><~.,t <br />t ..~'. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.