Laserfiche WebLink
RAMSEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS <br /> By: Principal Planner Patrick Trudgeon <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />On December 18, 2001, the Ramsey City Council adopted the March 2001 Draft Comprehensive <br />Plan along with new language regarding the Central Planning Area. During the summer and fall of <br />2001, the City Council met with facilitator Larry Bakken to work towards resolution on some of <br />the outstanding issues from the March 2001 draft of the Comprehensive Plan. From these <br />discussions, staff received direction from the City Council to bring forward text and future land use <br />map amendments for consideration. On January 24, 2002, the City Council and Planning <br />Commission held a joint public heating to consider the amendments. <br /> <br />The following items are enclosed: <br /> <br />a) <br />b) <br />c) <br />d) <br />e) <br />f) <br />g) <br /> <br />h) <br />i) <br />J) <br />k) <br />l) <br /> <br />Map showing proposed land use map amendments <br />Table showing information regarding the proposed land use map amendments <br />Proposed text amendments with changes highlighted <br />Draft Public Hearing minutes dated January 24, 2002 <br />Letter of interest for land use change from Tom Kurak <br />Letter of interest for land use change from property owners in Lutz Acres <br />Letter of interest for land use change from Brightkeys Building and Development <br />Corporation <br />Letter of interest for land use change from Oakwood Land Development, Inc. <br />Letter of interest for land use change from Dr. Tom Anderson <br />Letter of interest for MUSA expansion from Tom Thumb Food Markets, Inc. <br />Written comments from Pat Janke regarding Comprehensive Plan Amendments <br />Written comments from Richard and Linda Nelson regarding Comprehensive Plan <br />Amendments <br /> <br />Observations: <br /> <br />The City Council and Planning Commission heard testimony in regards to the 14 proposed land use <br />changes. In addition, several other issues were raised at the public hearing that the Planning <br />Commission should consider. Attached to this case is a synopsis of the amendments and the <br />comments heard on January 24~. The Planning Commission should refer to the minutes to get more <br />information on the public comments regarding the land use changes. <br /> <br />During the public hearing, a question was raised why the MUSA expansion did not require a <br />referendum vote. City Attorney Goodrich has indicated that a legal opimon of that portion of the <br />City Charter has been determined to be unlawful since and is not consistent with/he Municipal <br />Land Planning Act. The City Council has adopted the opinion and do not require MUSA <br />expansions to have a referendum vote. Another question was asked whether or not designating an <br />area as mixed-use will lead to possible litigation from developers. Attorney Goodrich has indicated <br />that his initial impression would be that it would not. Since the Comprehensive Plan is a general <br />guide for future land use and the fact that the mixed-use language designates what type of uses are <br />allowed, he feels that there is no greater danger for litigation with the mixed-use designation than <br />there would be for any other land use designation contained in the Comprehensive Plan. However, <br />he has not had the ability to research the matter further. <br /> <br /> <br />