Agenda - Council - 02/26/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I RAMSEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS By: Principal Planner Patrick Trudgeon Background: On December 18, 2001, the Ramsey City Council adopted the March 200I Draf~ Comprehensive Plan along with new language regarding the Central Rural Reserve Area. During the summer and fall of 200 l, the City Council met with facilitator Larry Bakken to work towards resolution on some of the outstanding issues from the March 2001 draft of the Comprehensive Plan. From these discussions, staff received direction from the City Council to bring forward text and future land use map amendments for consideration. On January 24, 2002, the City Council and Planning Commission held a joint public hearing to consider the amendments. The following items are enclosed: a) h) c) d) e) g) h) J) k) l) m) n) Map showing proposed land use map amendments Table showing information regarding the proposed land use map amendments Proposed text amendments summary Draf~ Public Hearing minutes dated January 24, 2002 Draft Planning Commission minutes dated February 7, 2002 Letter of interest for land use change from Tom Kurak Letter of interest for land use change from property owners in Lutz Acres Letter of interest for land use change from Brightkeys Building and Development Corporation Letter of interest for land use change from Oakwood Land Development, Inc. Letter of interest for land use change from Dr. Tom Anderson Letter of interest for MUSA expansion from Tom Thumb Food Markets, Inc. Written comments from Pat Janke regarding Comprehensive Plan Amendments Written comments fi'om Richard and Linda Nelson regarding Comprehensive Plan Amendments Proposed Resolutions Observations: The City Council and Planning Commission heard testimony in regards to the proposed land use changes. In addition, several other issues were raised at the public hearing that the City Council should consider. Attached to this case is a synopsis of the amendments and the comments heard on January 24t~ as well as the Planning Commission recommendations. The City Council should refer to the minutes to get more information on the public comments and Planning Commission action pertaining to the land use changes. During the public hearing, a question was raised why the MUSA expansion did not require a referendum vote. City Attorney Goodrich has indicated that a legal opinion of that portion of the City Charter has been determined to be unlawful since it is not consistent with the Municipal Land Planning Act. The City Council has adopted the opimon and does not require MUSA expansions to have a referendum vote. Another question was asked whether or not designating an area as mixed-use will lead to possible litigation from developers. Attorney Goodrich has indicated that his initial impression would be that it would not. Since the Comprehensive Plan is a general guide for future land use and the fact that the mixed-use language designates what type of uses are allowed, he feels that there is no greater danger for litigation with the mixed-use designation than -229-