Laserfiche WebLink
<br />revert back to the January 11, 2022 version. He stated arguably the developer could quite simply <br />check both criteria. He stated with State statues and Met Council requirements, when there is a <br />Comp Plan under their jurisdiction and the overall City density needs to remain at three units or <br />greater, he cautioned using this tool in too big of an area in Ramsey. If they fall below three units <br />per acre, there is concern the Met Council could deny future sewer connections such as a <br />commercial project. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff stated that is one of the big concerns in using this as a tool elsewhere, <br />because of the overall density with this project and others that are currently right at the level of <br />three units per acre would need higher density by The COR to develop to offset the three units per <br />acre to keep land farther away as more rural as time goes on. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove replied they have development in The COR that would help with those <br />numbers. She stated this is just for these two areas but asked if they could make another Comp <br />Plan amendment and could it qualify for this zoning area. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator/Community Dev. Director Hagen confirmed this and explained it could <br />be said that there is this district in existence. Someone could always ask to change the rules and it <br />would be reviewed to see if that made sense. Arguably, they are putting in place a district that has <br />been utilized and could be a starting place at a later date. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove stated she wasn’t supportive of the change because she liked the <br />original version that allows for opportunities for lower density in more rural areas and would help <br />comply with what the two developments were doing. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff emphasized this only effects MUSA properties because the Met <br />Council only looks at MUSA districts. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator/Community Dev. Director Hagen replied he is correct that Met Council <br />looks at the sewer. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked if only the density in those areas is counted, not the whole City. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff replied that is his understanding. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Woestehoff, seconded by Councilmember Riley, to adopt Resolution <br />#22-052 Supporting the Planning Commission’s Changes to a Comprehensive Plan Amendment <br />Adopted by Resolution #22-009. <br /> <br />Further discussion: <br />Councilmember Heineman responded to Mr. Walker’s comments that if this passes, this is proof <br />that this City Council is corrupt, noting that is an inflammatory statement. The Council is voting <br />to align the City with the Met Council to ensure fewer houses in the area so he felt that was a <br />disingenuous statement. He also expressed disappointment in Mr. Walker’s comments about <br />residents feeling targeted for speaking against the City Council. Mr. Walker replied his statements <br />weren’t inflammatory if they are true and he knows of residents who were targeted after they came <br />City Council / February 22, 2022 <br />Page 14 of 34 <br /> <br />