My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 01/23/2007
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2007
>
Agenda - Council - 01/23/2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 9:58:51 AM
Creation date
1/19/2007 3:21:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
01/23/2007
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
395
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 />Chairperson Nixt commented whether that is practical would depend on whether Mr. Becker <br />could convince someone to bring the MUSA into his neighborhood, which is beyond what is <br />being contemplated tonight. <br /> <br />Mr. Tim Curran, 17640 Eaton Street NW, stated he hopes cluster developments are eliminated. <br />It is a backdoor way to leave open for developers with enticement to bring in sewer and water. <br />Irregard1ess of the lot sizes he would recommend eliminating cluster developments from the <br />zoning. <br /> <br /> <br />Motion by Chairperson Nixt, seconded by Commissioner <br /> <br />lose the public hearing. <br /> <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Ni <br />Levine, and Trites Rolle. Voting No: None. A <br /> <br />The public hearing was closed at 9:34 p.m. <br /> <br />Commission Business <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt called the regular meetin <br />p.m. <br /> <br />cluster ordinance did not get <br />format. He struggles with 2 ~ <br />metro areas that are developing <br />e lots. His concern about the 2 ~ <br />e surrounding land to allow for the <br />ues for pres ees and other natural amenities on the <br />is a balance that goes with that and he is not opposed to <br />ts on why 1 in 10 is the right answer. <br /> <br />e, long range planning and the Metropolitan <br />reasons recommendation has been brought forward. If the <br />in something else staff needs to hear that as well. <br /> <br />agm <br />Lookin <br />about the p <br /> <br />e Metropolitan Council's support of the 4 in 40 is balanced <br />density in Lake Elmo. He stated this is not consistent. <br />er of 2007 there needs to be a decision to get aggressive <br />have ideas on what will be suggested for this area. <br /> <br />xplained the intent is to go to 4 in 40 until they can get into the <br />Comprehensive Plan p ess and talk about the vision for the rural part of the City. They are <br />hearing tonight there are different needs for different portions of the rural area, and a one size fits <br />all solution is not working, whether it is 4 in 40 or cluster. Different options will be looked at, <br />but there is a need to get into the Comprehensive Plan process with public involvement and hear <br />from the City Council. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/January 4, 2007 <br />Page 25 of 36 <br /> <br />-266- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.