Laserfiche WebLink
<br />hand in hand with the change in the density ordinance from 1 in 2 ~ to 1 in 10. He clarified with <br />Associate Planner Geisler that density was available based on 1 house in 2 ~ acres, but it was <br />required to be clustered. He noted at this point because clustering is mandatory and it has been <br />determined that the cluster ordinance has challenges, the issues they are trying to accommodate <br />are ones that relate to planning objectives that were attempted to be resolved through the cluster <br />ordinance that have yet to be adequately vetted out. <br /> <br />Mr. Eric Zaetsch, 6521 l54th Lane NW, stated the cluster ordinance was talked about in terms of <br />ghost platting the remainder and getting density. Tiger Meadows was mentioned, and he thinks <br />there was some Planning opposition to it and they preferred it would have been clustered. Mr. <br />Zaetsch stated Tiger Meadows is proof that 2 ~ acres are excellent; it preserves the rural feeling <br />of Ramsey, which a lot of people have said is why they came here. Later on there will be a <br />discussion of Ramsel, which deals with the greenspace concept. People can have their own <br />buffer and do a lot of things with 2 ~ acres. If there are areas where that exists, and it is later <br />filled in with higher density, then you have neighborhoods and sub-communities with a variation. <br />However, if it fills out with urban density entirely you have a vast feel of urban density, which is <br />not planning to him. He would like to see people have some options while the debate is going <br />on. Family circumstances might require development of some kind and they will be stuck with 4 <br />in 40. He knows the Planning Commission would listen to any individual proposal; <br />circumstances could force people into a distressed situation where they might have to sell and <br />they would be facing 4 in 40. <br /> <br />Ms. Jean Jackson, 17251 Armstrong Boulevard NW, she has a seven acre lot with 80 acres <br />around her. To her cluster means they will put 31 houses in 18 acres with the common septic <br />system up against her border, leaving the rest of the acreage open. When they say 2 ~ acres per <br />house they should say one house per 2 ~ acres, instead they are saying it covers the whole 80 <br />acres and put everything in one area. The houses will be on 1/3 acre lots, and when City sewer <br />and water comes in they will put another 180 houses across the street from her. 2 ~ acres should <br />mean one house on 2 ~ acres all the way across the land instead of 31 houses on 18 acres, <br />leaving it open for City sewer and water to come and put in the rest of the 186 houses. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt summarized Ms. Jackson does not support the clustering concept; she supports <br />2 ~ acre lots with one house per 2 ~ acres. <br /> <br />Mr. Ken Thomas, 17955 Argon Street NW, stated he does not support cluster developments. <br />The Planning Commission needs to look at every piece of land. He knows what these large <br />landowners are going through, but they need to look at every property and see if the traffic can <br />get out or if it will restrict others around them. The Commission needs to remember they are in a <br />rural area and they do not have exits. Safety wise and getting in and out they cannot have <br />gridlock seven miles out ofAnoka. <br /> <br />Mr. Zaetsch suggested the Commission ask for a show of hands for the following options: 4 in <br />40; clustering; 2 ~ acres. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/January 4, 2007 <br />Page 21 of35 <br />