My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/01/2007
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2007
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/01/2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 9:42:22 AM
Creation date
10/26/2007 3:05:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
11/01/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
167
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 />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor G~ec, Councilinembers Dehen, Olson, Elvig, Jeffrey, <br />Look, aIid Strommen. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #4: <br /> <br />. <br />. Adopt Ordinance to Rezone Property from E-l Employment to B-1 Business; . <br />Case of TSM Development, Inc. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler stated that this item is for the same project as Case #3, but a different <br />portion of the site. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Elvig, seconded by Councilme <br />16 to rezone the Subject Property from E-l Em <br />Metropolitan Council approval of the applicant's <br />approval. <br /> <br /> <br />to adopt Ordinance #07...; . <br />siness, contingent upon <br />endment and final plat <br /> <br />A roll call vote was performed by Mayor Gamec. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec: aye <br />Councilmember Dehen: aye <br />Councilme~ber Elvig: aye <br />Councilmember Jeffrey: aye <br />Councilmember Look: aye <br />Councilmember Olson: aye <br />Councilmember Strommen: aye <br /> <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />Case #5: <br /> <br />Request for <br />Holm <br /> <br />ent, Case of Dan Murphy and Tim <br /> <br />Associate <br />prope <br />like t <br />the' <br /> <br />urphy and Tim Holm have applied to rezone this <br />evelopment (PUD). She stated that they would <br />t the Planning Commission reviewed this plan at <br />ended denial. <br /> <br />the zoning remains as is, a commercial business could come <br />uld be no buffer for the residential area. <br /> <br />at there would be a buffer required even if this was developed <br /> <br />d that he has not been in favor of this change from the beginning and <br />feels residents would r er see businesses on this land than town homes. He stated that he does <br />not see a compelling reason to cram three buildings onto this lot and change the comprehensive <br />plan. He stated that he received the message during his campaign that people do not want <br />anymore town homes in the City. <br /> <br />City Council /October 9,2007 <br />Page 8 of 25 <br /> <br />31 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.