Laserfiche WebLink
2001 Comprehensive Plan <br />Amended February 26, 2002 <br /> <br />Issue 1 Residential Growth - Focus Group agreed on "well planned" <br />growth having the following characteristics: <br />· Blends in with existing development <br />· Is in balance with infrastructure and services <br />· Minimizes impact on existing development (cost, safety, traffic impacts) <br />· Is consistent with the natural resource base (water, wetlands, and trees) <br /> <br />Issue 2 Density of Population - The Focus Group postulated a solution <br />which includes the following elements: <br />· Overall density in rural areas in the range of one unit per two to five- <br /> acres (several scenarios to be evaluated including gross density with and <br /> without wetlands). <br />· Minimum rural lot size: based on a sustainable lot size for septic <br /> systems. <br />· Density should be relative to what is next door in all instances where <br /> future development may occur adjacent to existing large lot <br /> development. <br />· Urban densities allowable within MUSA <br /> <br />Issue 3 Housin~ Diversity - The Focus Group agreed on the following <br />solution: <br />· Diversity is okay if the transition/blending principle is adhered to which <br /> makes new development consistent with existing development. <br />· Home size and cost diversity should be allowed. <br />· No mobile homes should be allowed. <br />· Minimum home size with garages should be required. <br /> <br />Issue 4 - MUSA Expansion - The Focus Group unanimously supported the <br />following: <br />· MUSA expansion is acceptable for commercial and industrial <br /> development <br />· MUSA expansion should not create costs for existing rural residential <br /> owners unless they want services. <br />· Generally, MUSA expansion is acceptable westerly along Highway 10. <br /> <br />The Focus Group could not agree unanimously with the following: <br /> <br />· MUSA expansion allowable for petitioners who want services and are <br /> adjacent to the MUSA boundary. <br />· Support of a planning rather than referendum approach for MUSA <br /> expansion. <br /> <br />Issue 5 - Individual Property Rights - While everyone agreed that both <br />residents and landowners have rights, there was no resolution of this issue. <br /> <br />Issue 6 Parks~ Recreation~ Trails~ and Open Space - This does not <br />represent an issue, however, the Focus Group recommends as follows: <br />· More emphasis should be placed on open space in rural areas. <br />· More emphasis should be placed on urban active parks in urban areas. <br /> <br />2001 Ramsey Comprehensive Plan <br />Amended February 26, 2002 <br /> <br />Page III-1.5 <br /> <br /> <br />