Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/02/2006

Home

To adopt Resolution #06-09-_ identifying findings of fact in support of approving the request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Metropolitan Council for the three northern unplatted parcels, as the revised site plan indicates; Case of MN Skyline Partners, LLC, contingent on meeting all of the criteria for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, with the addition of condition no. 4 to the resolution to state that the land use change will be contingent on preliminary plat approval of Skyline Pointe. Motion on amendment carried. V oting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Cook, Olson, Elvig, Jeffrey, Olson, and Strommen. Voting No: None. Motion on the amended motion carried. V oting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Cook, Pearson, and Olson. Voting No: Councilmembers Elvig, Jeffrey, and Strommen. Further discussion: Councilmember Elvig requested the preliminary plat discussion include language regarding the traffic concern. Case #9: Request to Rezone Property from R-l Single Family Residential to Planned Unit Development; Case of MN Skyline Partners, LLC Community Development Director Trudgeon advised several of the findings as drafted are in the negative supporting the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial of the rezoning, specifically finding nos. 11, 16 and 17. Councilmember Strommen noted the rezoning to PUD may not be necessary due to the discussion of decreasing the number of units. Community Development Director Trudgeon suggested the discussion proceed to the preliminary plat under Case No. 10, prior to the rezoning discussion. Case #10: Request for Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Site Plan Approval of Skyline Pointe; Case of MN Skyline Partners, LLC Ms. Sarah Narr, 6100 151S! Lane NW, stated this is the residents' fourth meeting citing their case for a very strong community. They have submitted a petition with 50 plus signatures saying they do not want the zoning changed from R-l to R-2. Usually one or two people will come to these City Council meetings, but they are all here saying not to do this rezoning. They cannot even get out onto Highway 5; it took her eight minutes on Monday to get onto the road. The residents are here to make a strong point. A lot of people are getting caught up in that this development looks pretty. That is great, she wants Ramsey to look pretty; she has lived here her entire life. But greenspace gets them nowhere if they are killed in a car accident trying to get onto Highway 5. Ms. Narr stated everything they have been presented with for this development is R-2, but the property is zoned R-l. The Comprehensive Plan has this property zoned as R-l. They live on a block with % of an acre to one and two acre lots, and all of a sudden they will be squeezing in all of these houses. They live here and care a lot. Ms. Narr stated for the Council is saying that there are more people and more tax base, but she cares about the safety of her children and the children that live on her block. They voted for the Council to stand up for them and say first and City Council / September 26, 2006 Page 22 of 38 P42