Agenda - Council - 10/08/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CASE # DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL WASTE MANAGEMENT OF MINNESOTA, INC. PARCEL By: Ryan R. Schroeder, City Administrator Background: Council is aware! that, as part of an agreement with Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc., (WMMI) the City of Ramsey now controls about 100 acres north of the landfill. This property is severed by 153rd ~vcnue with the property to the north being approximately 21.7 acres in size. For the last two to~ three years, the City has been discussing the development of the two parcels of property gained tl?ough the settlement transaction. The southern parcel has a deed restriction for park and public u~e. The northern parcel does not. It has been contemplated within the last three capital improvem{nt programs that proceeds from the development of the north parcel would be directed to develgpment of the park parcel. On November 9, 1993, by consensus, Council directed that staff[send out Request for Proposals to all the developers who do business in the City regarding develop~nent of this parcel. Until this year, we did not effectively have clear title on this parcel to allow tha~t to occur. We also did not know when municipal services would be available to the site. (Development of Fox Knoll Second Addition has resulted in utilities being constructed across Sunfish Lake Boulevard to the park property.) On March 12, 1996, Council again considered this project. It was tabled to October for reconsideration. Attached for yo~ review is the Request for Proposals for purchase and development of this property. You will note that it is contemplated that development will be timed such as to a/low for dedication of salel; and development proceeds to be directed to the Alpine Park. Development of this park is expeC~d to provide for additional RYAA programming needs (in that Federal is not interested in a Cer~tral Park expansion at this time). Actual park design is yet to be determined but is expected to be Ycomplete by year end. The attached concept plan is the most recent version identified by the P~hrk and Recreaton Commission. As previously dir~ted by Council, it is proposed that this RFP be sent to every developer having done business within the City of Ramsey in the past few years. Additionally, there are a number of developers thatI have contacted the City recently in search of property. We will contact these persons as well. :Further, it will be publicly advertised. Within the CIP, it is projected that $225,000 will be made available for park development as a result of development of this parcel. As noted below, ~ is expected that this number is conservative. You w/Il note in the RFP that, while single family development is contemplated, development proposals with other densities or housing types is also invited. The reasons for that are as follows: Other than the Rum River Townhouses, Ramsey currently does not provide housing choiaes other than single family (and one apartment building). . The housing adjacent to the north has an average County estimated market value (1995) of $76,705 (structure average of $62,900). Housing of significantly greater valu~ than that may not be desired by the neighborhood. 3. We may want to encourage a mixed density/design subdivision plan. 4. We may want to encourage creativity in subdivision concepts. If a townhouse s~le development is proposed, it should be expected that $2,500 to $4,500/unit will be offered forlthe land. If it is sold as single family, we should be able to command $12,000 lq