Agenda - Council - 03/08/2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

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