My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 08/14/2007
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2007
>
Agenda - Council - 08/14/2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 1:31:18 PM
Creation date
8/10/2007 9:47:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
08/14/2007
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.
/
476
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
Commissioner Van Scoy asked if the other children in the surrounding neighborhood have to go <br />to the same park and make the same crossing. <br />City Engineer Jankowski replied the children on Germanium Street north of Sunwood Drive <br />would also have to cross Sunwood Drive to get to Solstice Park. <br />Chairperson Nixt noted there is currently not a trail on the east side of CR 5. <br />City Engineer Jankowski replied there is not, but it is a goal to have the trail in place by fall. <br />Commissioner Van Scoy asked where the trail will be placed and how it will go through the <br />existing neighborhoods. <br />City Engineer Jankowski advised the policy has been that where the City has property rights <br />through subdivisions, they ask that the trail be located in the subdivision whenever possible. He <br />explained currently if Ramsey Elementary School were to be vacated the children are moved to <br />the old city hall site. It is anticipated that within a couple of years that will no longer be a viable <br />option, and Lord of Life Church has agreed to be the host location site, in which case it would be <br />necessary to have a trail. Ramsey Elementary School accommodates a fair number of <br />handicapped children so the trail would need to be hard surfaced. <br />Commissioner Van Scoy asked if there are density transitioning requirements if a PUD were to <br />be granted. <br />Associate Planner Dalnes replied the density transitioning is a gray area; the code specifies <br />density transitioning from R -1 to R -2 zoning, and the 3.3 units per acre density with this <br />development would barely be more than R -1 zoning would allow. <br />Chairperson Nixt indicated he believes it would be appropriate to rezone this site to PUD if the <br />appropriate development and preliminary plat were submitted for the site. <br />Motion by Commissioner Levine, seconded by Commissioner Van Scoy, to adopt Findings of <br />Fact in favor of the request to rezone the proposed plat of Bridgewater from R -1: Single Family <br />Residential to Planned- Unit - Development; and to recommend that the City Council approve the <br />request to rezone the proposed plat of Bridgewater from R -1: Single- Family Residential to <br />Planned- Unit - Development, contingent upon plat approval; and based on the findings of fact. <br />Further discussion: Commissioner Cleveland asked if the PUD would require a residential <br />development, or if it would be opened up for any type of development. Associate Planner Dalnes <br />replied the PUD is associated with a plat; the plat and PUD would have to be approved at the <br />same time. Commissioner Brauer stated there needs to be a compelling reason in order to <br />rezone. The applicant has stated that the only reason he is doing this is economic; he could put <br />four houses on the lot, but for economic reasons will put five. He does not see that this site <br />should be rezoned just for an economic reason. They have never done it before, and he does see <br />it here. Chairperson Nixt indicated he has a concurring thought, but does not share the same <br />Planning Commission/ June 7, 2007 <br />Page 22 of 31 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.