Agenda - Council - 04/13/2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CONSIDER OPTIONS FOR LAND USE DESIGNATION OF 18055 ROANOKE ST NW RELATED TO THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE; CASE OF CITY OF RAMSEY By: Tim Gladhill, Associate Planner Background: Per Minnesota Statute §473.859, each community in the seven - county metro area is required to submit a Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council every ten years. The Update has been reviewed by the Metropolitan Council, which made the following actions: • Authorized the City to put the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update into effect • Accepted the forecasts (population, households, and employment) identified in the review record • Provided advisory comments to incorporate into the draft • Approved the City's Tier II Comprehensive Sewer Plan. On February 3, 2010, the City Council approved the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update, contingent upon securing documentation from the parcel at 18055 Roanoke Street NW. Notification: Per State Statute, a Public Hearing was properly notified and held in November of 2008. Parcels affected by a proposed land use designation change were notified via standard U.S. Mail. Observations: CASE # '7.0a On February 3, 2010, the City Council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, contingent on securing documentation from the owner of 18055 Roanoke Street NW. Staff has been in discussions with Joyce Reidhead, owner of the Subject Property. The Subject Property is within the Master Plan boundaries for the Rum River Central Park. The Subject Property is indicated as Future Acquisition by Anoka County Parks. Anoka County Parks is the implementing agency for this regional park. Any acquisition of the Subject Property would be completed by this agency, working closely with the Metropolitan Council. According to the Metropolitan Council, all Comprehensive Plan Updates in the Metropolitan Council's jurisdiction dealing with in- holding parcels have been required to, and have, guided in- holdings as `Park'. Similarly, the City of Oak Grove adopted its 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update with similar in- holding parcels for the Rum River Central Regional Park. Ultimately, the Subject Property is targeted as a future acquisition, but only at a time the Property Owner, or future Property Owners, choose to sell the Subject Property. Given that the long range plans include this parcel as park land, it would seem appropriate to show the Subject Property as `Park' on the Future Land Use Map. Ms. Reidhead has indicated she is not supportive of the request to re -guide her parcel as `Park'. Ms. Reidhead's main concern appears to be her ability to maintain the Subject Property as a residence once the Subject Property is re- guided as `Park'. It is important to note that the Subject Property's existing use as a residential parcel would be protected by Minnesota Statute §462.357 Subd. 1e as well as Ramsey City Code §117-57. It is also important to note that even under current zoning, the Subject Property would not be allowed to further subdivide due to minimum lot size and buildable area.