MUSA Boundary Changes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-2- x Acted upon by planning commission (if applicable) on Approved by governing body, contingent upon Metropolitan Council review, on Considered but not approved by governing body on The Ramsey City Council discussed the proposed amendment on Other March 28, 1989 and voted to submit tha minced amendment to MC for review. E. Indicate what adjacent local governmental units affected by the change have been sent copies of the plan amendment and the date(s) copies were sent to them. Notification of affected adjacent governmental units is required for'major plan amendments.; Copies of the plan amendment have heen sent to the Cities of Anoka Andover, Champlin and Dayton (Cnnrurrent transmittal to rnmmunities April 17. 1989) Because of the comprehensive nature of most major plan amendments, a summary checklist is more useful to ensure that the amendment is complete for Council review and to determine whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the metropolitan systems plans or other chapters of the Metropolitan Development Guide. Please indicate whether the amendment affects the following factors. Where it does, the materials submitted must fully address the issue(s). II. IMPACT ON REGIONAL SYSTEMS A. Sewers 1. Change in city's year 2000 flow projections. No /Not Applicable. x Yes. The city's year 2000 flow projections will increase (see attachment) but still be within capacity limits. 2. Community discharges to more than one metropolitan interceptor. No /Not Applicable. X Yes. Indicate which interceptor will be affected by the amendment. The Rum River interceptor would receive ii1£reaaed flow but still be within capacity limits. B. Transportation 1. Relationship to Council policies regarding metropolitan highways. X No /Not Applicable. Yes. 2. Change in type and intensity of land uses at interchanges and other locations within a quarter -mile of the metropolitan highway system? X No /Not Applicable. Yes. 11