Minutes - Council - 03/13/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

utilizing the area east of Sunfish Lake. It is a significant sized parcel (118 acres) and is totally surrounded by City services. In as much as the services are there and the infrastructure is already bonded, we should try to utilize the densities somewhat higher to get a greater payback to our City faster, rather than waiting for the "yet to be sewered" yellow properties in our Comprehensive Plan to be developed residential. I would like to see that land have a little higher designation. We might consider changing the 118 acres east of Sunfish Lake from three units per acre to four units per acre. It would seem logical to me that any purchaser and/or developer of that property would use a PUD form of plat. There is enough land area to more than buffer existing houses where necessary. Also, the collector street, Sunwood Drive, should be considered when planning that area. When we retain the majority of residential development in the lower section of Ramsey, south of the current MUSA line, we are assuring our citizens in the large lot area the lifestyles they moved to Ramsey to enjoy. By underutilizing our existing infrastructure we are risking MUSA expansion sooner than anyone, myself included, would want to see. On the Mixed Use vs. Industrial, I have several concerns and opinions. In short, the bottom line is our residents have been patiently awaiting shopping, services, and transportation solutions for their community. The Smart Growth Grant aside, I want to see a Towne Center developed with a sense of community and charm. We have an incredible opportunity to have pride in our Highway #10 corridor. There should be some housing, preferably above the commercial shops in the mixed use area, to utilize the services and to balance the whole development with character. This also Will relieve some burdens to have higher density housing elsewhere in our city." Councilmember Anderson stated the transition is important to some people but one of the goals is to protect the integrity of existing neighborhoods. She stated that goal has been here all the time and this is a wonderful opportunity to take advantage. Motion by Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember Kurak, to approve the Comprehensive Plan subject to review and comment of the Metropolitan Council. Further discussion: City Administrator Norman commented on the meetings held and concessions made with the Plan. He stated he prefers to have 5-0 support and asked Councilmember Zimmerman if he would support the Plan if the Central Planning portion was removed from the document. Councilmember Zimmerman stated there has been only two to three meetings since Councilmember Kurak has been on the Council and while making headway he believes there are still hurdles to get over. He stated the worst thing is to jam it down the Council. City Administrator Norman asked if he would vote for it if that section was removed. Councilmember Zimmerman stated he would not. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that December of 1999 was a formal submission of the Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council and it was not until October 4 that they considered it to be complete. He stated it is not this Council that is holding people hostage over 4 in 40, it is the Metropolitan Council's edict that we have a 4 in 40 at all; a demand they made in the early 1990s. He stated the City did what they could to not implement it for as long as they could. Councilmember Hendriksen stated if they were to allow Ramsey to develop in the way we would like to, it would not be an issue. But that is a demand they are making. Mayor Gamec stated he believes this Plan is excellent the way City Council/March 13, 2001 Page 29 of 31