My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 04/10/2001
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2001
>
Agenda - Council - 04/10/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 12:20:53 PM
Creation date
9/4/2003 11:44:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
04/10/2001
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.
/
269
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
I want to address the fear of Central Planning Area becoming sewered in the near future? We <br /> have not come even close to filling up the available residential areas that are already sun~o{inded- <br /> with services. Add to that, the foreseen expansion out to the west on Highwayi~i'9;-t0wards <br /> Northfork and I can't see how we will or can even consider expanding service~"imrth of the <br /> existing ~MUSA line. Coupled with the laws we have right now governing opt{01~i ~eW~ hook <br /> up by residents, I don't see where we as a city would want to invest in infrastructure th~i':~q~!d <br /> not be utilized by a majority of the homeowners So I will not be convin~ Cat there is <br /> sewer expansion because of the Central Planning Area. It is a good compromii~' for our City <br /> an excellent opportunity for many of our rural citizens. Density~Tr~i~tion?,i':'have read the <br /> Density Transition Language that was drafted on January 25,200i~:i;'I'as~h~e.that this is the most <br /> up to date version. I find I can agree with most of the language'm that dr~i~t and will vote for a <br /> plan with that language in it. It seems reasonable and.dis~S-~uard aga/r~st the many fears that ~'''~ <br /> residents have regarding new development next,::i6:~':i'~xisting deg~16pment. Land Use <br /> Map/Classifications. Regarding designating all indUlt~ia~i" fii'e on High~ay,:I_'0i ~ want to express <br /> a serious concern. At the present time we have 3 b[~ilding~'."ih our:-~d~strf/~('park that are not <br /> being utilized. Listal Industries on Sunfish Lake Boulevard, 'h0~.-O~f the tracks and the Mate <br /> Punch and Die'building just to the north of Listal Industries are vacant. The Amcom Properties <br /> across the street from Listal have been completed for over 2 year!'and-:onlytig}'~a handful of <br /> tenants. As a Councilperson, these e~ples trouble me greatly. Its ~yl un~te~s:{anding that the <br /> Ramsey Industrial Park is not yet S°ld 0~t'"-RiXJerdale along Highway 10'i~i~)~oon Rapids, is an <br /> example of the market in actiom'COmPanies ar~':h0t,i~t~rested in what that area has to offer. The <br /> piece by piece purchasing and'developing is not wh~e-the~"inuestOrs are look/ng to put their <br /> money. I am reluctant to take the chan6eof that hai~p~ng i~.~6ur ~ity when we have investors <br /> waiting to build our Town Center, with 6gf:citiz~nSlnput, and ~ake it a viable reality. Empty <br /> buildings are not healthy for Ramsey. We-hav~'-:to take a lo°k at the market and plan our city <br /> accordingly. The market drives development..-We as a city guide that development. I do not <br /> believe, with my knowledge of the market, tha~, 0ur.~_base will be in jeopardy. I have gone on <br /> record stating my opinion on;'commercial / indUs~al'i'ax base, but the long and short of it is that <br /> we can h&vea strong growi~ag 'commumty w.i~ ilgnificant tax base 'that will enable Ramsey to <br /> prosper and- grow in the ra°gt beneficial way ,tO'all, by having the diversity necessary to maintain <br /> its strength. When. t. atldng about the ~Pp0~hties we have within our grasp, the Smart Growth <br /> Grant is just the'tip_ of the iceberg. Th~'multimodal station, the Town Center and the bridge <br />~' 'Cros'Sing is vital to theheatth of this community. I am in strong support of all those items and I <br /> wani a.Comprehensiv¢'Plan in'place that will allow us to attain these goals. We as a City. <br /> Council hav6-enormous C0ntr°!:'over how our City is built and how it grows. I want the future <br /> generations to look back aY-what we plan here today and be proud of our foresight and efforts. <br /> Even though f-d~n't agree'With everything in this Comprehensive Plan, I am in favor of sending <br /> it down for apProval. I want to see our tax dollars come back to us through the grants the <br /> Metropolitan Council, the State, the County and Federal governments have to offer. We are l~o_n_g <br />-,.'-: ..over due. If the numbers of households meet the criteria of the Metropolitan Council, I do not <br /> '" have a probleTM of how and where the plan is placing the different residential uses. The area <br /> between the landfill and Sunfish Lake Boulevard is assigned medium density (7 units per acre). <br /> There are no services directly available to that parcel at this time. However, I feel we are under <br /> utilizing the area East of Sunfish Lake. It is a significant sized parcel (118 acres) and is totally <br /> <br />-110- <br /> <br />City Council/March 13, 2001 <br /> Page 28 of 31 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.