Minutes - Charter Commission - 07/10/1997

Home

Chairperson Peterson suggested that he and/or Commissioner Swokowski contact someone from the State Legislature or the Attorney General's office at the October meeting to discuss some issues and points of vagueness with regard to Chapter 410. Case #1: Review Proposed Charter Amendment Terry Hendriksen, 15631 Ramsey Boulevard NW, Ramsey, author of the proposed Charter amendment, stated it was written to protect the community standard and quality of life when faced with high density development and the impact it has on the adjoining low density areas. This is a handful of people's attempts to take care of this problem and it was probably focused on the case at hand. He stated that there should be something to mitigate the impact when you produce a development that has the potential of about 1,200 to 1,500 cars to an existing neighborhood. John Peterson, Good Value Homes, stated that his company would work to try to defeat this amendment. He appealed to the Commission to decide that this amendment would be manifestly unconstitutional. He asked Mr. Hendriksen if plats that have been given preliminary approval would be subject to the retroactivity clause to which Mr. Hendriksen did not know. Mr. Peterson and some members of the Charter Commission felt that this is the way it reads. Mr. Peterson then stated that Mr. Hendriksen has admitted that the genesis of this amendment was targeted to a certain development - Apple Ridge. He discussed lots abutting other lots and if they had to be developed at the same density, there would be areas in his proposed development that would have to be 20 acres in size. He suggested this amendment is so unfair and so damaging to the City of Ramsey, he could not believe it would be seen as constitutional. Commissioner Anderson commented that a lot has been said about traffic generation and she felt it would be a problem if the City started to limit plat density based on traffic of the existing neighborhood. Discussion ensued relating to the language of the amendment and what it is intended to mean. Comments were taken from Charles Johnson who lives in the neighborhood adjacent to the proposed Apple Ridge. He was concerned about the added traffic and the quality of life. Mr. Hendriksen commented that, with regard to density and the way the amendment reads, as lots go up in size, then the density goes down. He stated that's what their intent was and he felt that would be accomplished with this language. Chris Dempsey, 14794 Krypton Court NW, Ramsey, presented some information showing that Apple Ridge was the target of this proposed Charter amendment. At the date of this material, there were at least four or five other developments in the platting process and the only one mentioned is Apple Ridge. He noted the changes in the original plans for Apple Ridge due to John Peterson meeting with the adjacent neighborhoods. He suggested that the discussion this evening has pointed out the very nebulous state of this Charter amendment. He expressed concern about the "mess" if this amendment passes and the fact that it may deter developers from developing the City. If so, he wondered where the City would recoup the revenue lost from building permits and how would parks be developed without dedication fees. He noted that in Charter Commission/July 1 O, 1997 Page 3 of 5