Minutes - Council - 03/11/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

consideration their feelings and hard work would be inappropriate. Councilmember Haas Steffen responded that the exclusion portion of the proposed ordinance is to protect the City if protection is needed and she is waiting for legal advice to see if it is needed. She reiterated that past practice has not been according to the law for the past 14 years and she is trying to stay in a neutral zone - not allowing buyers and developers to sue the City for their losses. She suggested if we wait until the next meeting, we will know how to proceed and we have hurt neither party. Mr. Nixt interpreted that as the City trying to find an economic out. He stated he is addressing the Council as a resident of the City and that he is feeling angry about this. He believes this is about justification, vindication and rights. Wayne Johnson, representing Mr. Barthold who is the owner of the property that's at the center of this issue, stated that Mr. Nixt does not own that 60 acres, Jake Barthold does. He suggested that Mr. Nixt is very articulate and persuasive, but there are still property rights in this country and a land owner may sell his land to a developer. Mr. Johnson understood that Mr. Nixt brought a map that he obtained from the City and he characterized that as the map the City gives to the public to define the MUSA - that is not accurate. He added that even though he does have a financial interest in this matter, property owners still have rights and the property owners ought to have a say as well as the neighbors. John Peterson, developer of the proposed Apple Ridge, informed Council that he would have to explore his legal rights also. He pointed out that Mr. Barthold has been told over a period of years that his property is zoned a certain way and he's made economic decisions based on that. We need to find out what a citizen's rights are in relying on information given by it's government. We are hoping that the courts will honor that information the City has given us and that Council will recognize that you have a moral obligation to back up these statements and the information. Christian, 7330 - 155th Avenue NW, Ramsey, suggested that just because the land owner has 60 acres shouldn't mean he has more say, if the neighbors put all their parcels together, that would equal more land. He added "we do not want people stacked like cordwood". Terry Hendriksen, 15631 Ramsey Boulevard NW, Ramsey, stated that he is the one that walked to the window at City Hall and asked for a copy of the comprehensive plan. The 1994 version is what was provided to him and he opened the map that depicts the MUSA line and that's the map that does not include the 40 acres of Apple Ridge. He stated that the comprehensive plan amendment has gone on for years. The reason, in his opinion, is because we, as a City, could not form a consensus on what should be there. He felt it's inappropriate to proceed as if we had adopted this. There were very real concerns and no one could get the affirmative votes to pass that plan. Douglas Fountain, 15255 Garnet Street NW, Ramsey, believed that Mr. Hendriksen is a good part of this problem as he (Hendriksen) spent 14 to 16 years on the Planning Commission. Rick Hasbrook, 6040 Radium Circle NW, Ramsey, stated that we (the existing neighborhood) are not against Mr. Peterson building houses; we are against the density. It's about our rights as citizens to live our life the same. Councilmember Zimmerman stated he feels there is a problem in this area and that the moratorium should apply to Apple Ridge subdivision also. This needs to get straightened out. Ms. Svare thanked Mr. Zimmerman for his support and for speaking out for the residents. She added that, as far as Terry Hendriksen being a part of the problem, she felt people were just jealous of his knowledge of the City. Mayor Gamec pointed out that he has several questions that need answering but he did not have a problem introducing the ordinance because it can be changed. Councilmember Zimmerman stated that there is a problem because it is not clear if Apple Ridge is in the MUSA. If our attorney tells us that it is not in the MUSA, and we have taken action, we may be liable. Our attorney has already told us there may be a City Council/March 11, 1997 Page 7 of 13