My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1998 Correspondence
>
Comprehensive Plan
>
Comprehensive Plan (old)
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
1998 Correspondence
>
1998 Correspondence
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2006 12:20:13 PM
Creation date
9/19/2006 12:19:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Miscellaneous
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />With the 120 acres I own and the 80 acres to the east, belonging to Floyd Gamm, there is only at <br />best approximately 100 of these 200 acres suitable for building. The remainder of the land is <br />either wetlands, lakes, or low lying acres. This is a very high percentage compared to much of <br />the surrounding available property. The wet area goes 2 miles east of my property to Cty Rd 5. <br />There are several areas where the wetland areas meet Cty Rd. 64 -and extend to Cty Rd 63 or the <br />south. These properties can never be built up or have a high density. There are not many areas <br />that could be developed that are not already developed. Thus, if everything was developed that is <br />presently available, it would be difficult to exceed a 1 in 10 density. Floyd Gamm, my neighbor, <br />owns 160 acres total, 80 acres in Ramsey and 80 acres in Burns Township, which is where he <br />homesteads. Since Floyd is in his seventies, he would hate to wait another 20 years to sell his <br />farm, or worse yet, only be able to sell the Bums Township side and not the Ramsey side. The <br />Gamms feel it would be very unfair if they cannot sell the Ramsey acres in anything less than 10 <br />acre tracts, while the Burns Township acres could be sold in 5 acres tracts or less." <br /> <br />Jeffrey & Cinde Boldenow, 14623 Bowers Drive NW - "As residents of Bowers Driver NW, we <br />are opposed to any "park trail system" as proposed in the City of Ramsey's Comprehensive Plan <br />for the following reasons: <br />1. The proposed location is not specific as to its exact location and use. <br />2. We moved to this community to enjoy the privacy offered from others than those who are in <br />the Bowers Drive community. A trail system would obviously increase the amount of traffic <br />in our area from those outside the Bowers Drive community. <br />3. An increase in traffic from those outside the Bowers Drive community will lead to an <br />increase of crime. A trail system in a heavily wooded area behind homes is an obvious <br />attraction for criminals who need easy access to homes, yet well concealed. <br />4. Weare not clear on the zoning proposed for the land directly behind the north side of Bowers <br />Drive NW. <br />5. We oppose any destruction of wildlife that could endanger the homes of species in the <br />Mississippi River Corridor. <br />6. More planning meetings need to be set to ensure all neighbors have a chance to give input <br />about the community's future." <br /> <br />Dennis O'Keefe, Ramsey Brake & Exhaust, 5143 179th Lane NW - "I agree that a timely plan of <br />development of land is needed to have uniform sewer, water & traffic districting in orderly <br />fashion (which saves money & man hours later). What troubles me is when land owners on <br />edges of developed tracts are held hostage by Comp Plans and taxed heavily on their land & not <br />being given any opportunity to develop. Then being told they can but trying to make them pay <br />for complete studies of a whole tract of an area is not fair nor just. I believe you need to work <br />hand in hand & allowing certain land to develop on piece by piece review and not just turning <br />your back on them stating your Comp Plan time date lines and other resident concern. These <br />people should have some consideration also. I also feel a 2 day review of a 128 page document <br />is not enough time to adeptly read and understand this document, and as a resident who pays <br />taxes in this area I am formally requesting a (revised) copy of this for my own business & <br />personal use as I also speculate in land deals. I believe it's a fair request. I also want to thank <br />you for your time & explaining your & City's views to me. I know this is a tough, thankless job <br />to which I am willing to give input & help. Please feel free to call. Let's work together." <br /> <br />Planning Commissionillecember 1, 1998 <br />Page 7 of 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.