Laserfiche WebLink
<br />in the findings. Mayor Gamec suggested a recommendation that a review of the traffic impacts <br />on this entire stretch come back before the Council. City Attorney Goodrich suggested if the <br />Council is proceeding to a vote, that the motion on the floor be amended to include condition no. <br />4, stating that the land use change will be contingent on preliminary plat approval of Skyline <br />Pointe. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Cook, seconded by Councilmember Olson, to amend the motion on <br />the floor as follows: To adopt Resolution #06-09-310 identifying findings of fact in support of <br />approving the request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Metropolitan Council for the three <br />northern unplatted parcels, as the revised site plan indicates; Case of MN Skyline Partners, LLC, <br />contingent on meeting all of the criteria for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, with the <br />addition of condition no. 4 to the resolution to state that the land use change will be contingent <br />on preliminary plat approval of Skyline Pointe. <br /> <br />Motion on amendment carried. V oting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Cook, Olson, <br />Elvig, Jeffrey, Olson, and Strommen. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Motion on the amended motion carried. V oting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Cook, <br />Pearson, and Olson. Voting No: Councilmembers Elvig, Jeffrey, and Strommen. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Councilmember Elvig requested the preliminary plat discussion include <br />language regarding the traffic concern. <br /> <br />Case #9: <br /> <br />Request to Rezone Property from R-l Single Family Residential to Planned <br />Unit Development; Case of MN Skyline Partners, LLC <br /> <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon advised several of the findings as drafted are in the <br />negative supporting the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial of the rezoning, <br />specifically finding nos. 11, 16 and 17. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen noted the rezoning to PUD may not be necessary due to the <br />discussion of decreasing the number of units. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon suggested the discussion proceed to the <br />preliminary plat under Case No.1 0, prior to the rezoning discussion. <br /> <br />Case #10: <br /> <br />Request for Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Site Plan Approval of Skyline <br />Pointe; Case of MN Skyline Partners, LLC <br /> <br />Ms. Sarah Narr, 6100 - 151st Lane NW, stated this is the residents' fourth meeting citing their <br />case for a very strong community. They have submitted a petition with 50 plus signatures saying <br />they do not want the zoning changed from R-l to R-2. Usually one or two people will come to <br />these City Council meetings, but they are all here saying not to do this rezoning. They cannot <br />even get out onto Highway 5; it took her eight minutes on Monday to get onto the road. The <br />residents are here to make a strong point. A lot of people are getting caught up in that this <br />development looks pretty. That is great, she wants Ramsey to look pretty; she has lived here her <br /> <br />City Council / September 26, 2006 <br />Page 22 of 39 <br />