Laserfiche WebLink
receiving anyway, <br /> <br />Mr. Barton replied that he would have to appeal to ~amsey's oonscious; both <br />Ramsey and Metro Council have a vested interest. <br /> <br />[tawkin James - Developer of Alpaca Estates - Stated he purchased the property <br />,t a time when it was planned for 1 in 2-1/2 density and stated that he <br />doesn't ever plan to develop again. A density of 1 in 10 is impossible to <br />develop, especially with blacktop streets, and impossible for the City to <br />maintain. ~l~e cost of holding onto this land beoome such that you cannot <br />retrieve or make back what you lost; a developer or two are needed on t. be <br />Metro Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Rick Foster - Stated that studies were done 2-1/2 years ago regarding <br />whether or not to bring in $2,000,000 worth of pipe and develop River's Bend; <br />all issoes brought up tonight were discussed then and the 1 in 10 rural <br />density played a major part in the decision to proceed with River's Bend. To <br />change the rules now would make River's Bend developers very nervous. Some of <br />the reasons 2-1/2 acre lots are not selling is because of recession, <br />financing, high interest rates and lender hesitation on tlnsewered property. <br />~be moment of truth for River's Bend developers is a year from May, when the <br />first assessment is due, and those developers would be very scared if Ramsey <br />went to 2-1/2 acre density, interest rates came down and government started <br />[xx~ping money into housing. <br /> <br />Mayor Beitman inquired if Rmnsey has a review plan for future projects. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka replied that since 1982, Ramsey has followed the 1 in 10 <br />requirement except for Rum River Hills. <br /> <br />Mr. Barton suggested looking at density in Ramsey through a broader <br />perspective. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka replied that Ramsey's existing overall density is 1 in 5. <br /> <br />Mayor l~eitman noted that a codified cost of services was mentioned earlier and <br />inquired if Planning and Zoning would prepare something like this for Ramsey <br />over a period of time. <br /> <br />Mr. Peterson stated that Planning and Zoning oould prepare a codification of <br />oost of services in the future, but there are more pressing issues nc~. <br />~here are persons in tonight's audience that want to give each of their t~o <br />children a 2-acre parcel and a developer proposing a project with a density of <br />1 in 4.6 acres; acoording to tonight's conversation, these requests will have <br />to be denied unless we can be real inventive. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich inquired if considering overall city land area density to allow <br />for develol~ent today could be taking away from a property owner's right to <br />develop in the future. <br /> <br />Mr. Barton agreed that Mr. Goodrich's point should be looked at; giving credit <br />to the first developer could interfere with the final developer. <br /> <br />Council recessed at 9:30 p.m. <br /> <br />Mayor lteitman called the meeting back to order at 9:48 p.m. <br /> March 7, 1985 <br /> <br />Page 5 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />