Laserfiche WebLink
November 6th 2017 <br />Dear Mayor Strommen and City Council Members, <br />First of all, thank you for the work you do for our city and for taking time to listen to <br />the residents of Ramsey. Feeling heard by our government officials is what makes Ramsey <br />such a great place to live. I'm writing this letter today to address some concerns I have with <br />the proposed development: North Fork Meadows near Alpine Dr. and Puma St. <br />This has been my first experience working with local government and I'd like to say <br />that I greatly appreciate the process the city of Ramsey is using to allow for resident input. <br />Since this is new to me I've been learning as we go and feel like I gain new perspective at <br />each step along the way. From the beginning I feel like we have been asked how we can <br />come to some sort of compromise with the developer. I was confused at this as I felt that it <br />should be the responsibility of the developer to compromise as the property in question is <br />zoned R-1 and they are the ones asking for it to be changed. Through several meetings <br />Paxmar has made changes to their development in an attempt to ease the residents <br />concerns and it has been portrayed at times that the residents are satisfied with these <br />changes. Ultimately, I would like the property to remain zoned R-1. <br />It has become clear throughout these meetings that Paxmars sole motivation for <br />requesting a zoning amendment is financial. It was confirmed in the last planning <br />commission meeting that Paxmar knew the zoning before coming into a contract with the <br />landowner. Why should the current residents have to compromise on a promise the city <br />made to us because Paxmar didn't negotiate a better deal on the purchase of this property? <br />Paxmar has argued that the numbers just don't work for the property to be developed as R- <br />1. I disagree and can point to two other developments in Ramsey (Capstones -Brookfield and <br />Lennars-Woodlands) that are currently being developed as R-1 next to rural developing and <br />they are successfully selling their homes for $300,000+. Another builder can develop this <br />property as it is zoned. <br />Along the way I have tried to consider the possible benefits to the city of Ramsey if <br />this is developed as something other than R-1. While I understand the argument that stores, <br />restaurants and businesses are hesitant to come without more homes in Ramsey, I do not <br />think that should rest upon one parcel of land here in Ramsey. Looking into some of the <br />other projects Ramsey has developing I think that the city is accomplishing the task of <br />establishing more homes without having to change the zoning of this one property. <br />I do also understand that there is potential benefit of gaining land for a proposed <br />greenway corridor. I would ask you to strongly consider the fact that this is mostly <br />undevelopable wetland; that would cost the property owner a lot of money to convert into <br />developable land and consider the possibilities of how the city may acquire this land in <br />other ways. <br />In closing I urge you to consider the promise that was made to residents with the <br />Comprehensive Plan and current zoning in Ramsey. Is the city's integrity of holding to this <br />promise worth compromise due to the poor negotiating of one developer and the gain of <br />some already undevelopable property? Thank you again for taking the time to hear your <br />residents of Ramsey. <br />Sincerely, <br />Leslie Clark <br />15150 Kangaroo St. NW Ramsey <br />