1999 Correspondence - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

e e .Ramsey Critical Area Plan Page 7 units per acre? Depending on above answers, we have serious concerns about the proposal for 5 units for acre. Depending on how calculated and located, this is anywhere from 3 to 10 times the density allowed under Wild and Scenic River rules whether sewered or unsewered. It is not expected that the rules revisions will allow such increases of density, nor lot sizes per unit of around 9000 sq ft. It is also not known what kind of multiple-attached housing may be allowed under the rules revisions, or where. This type of density does not comply with the purposes of the Wild and Scenic River designation and regulations, and was never the intent of such a designation. In fact, many might say that this intensity of development was exactly what Wild and Scenic designation was trying to prevent. It is especially difficult to see the logic or any hardship given the size of Ramsey, available lands outside the Corridor, and existing conditions within the Corridor. The Mississippi Wild and Scenic/Critical Area Corridor should not be taking the brunt of the development or increased density within a given city or township. How does this density proposal corroborate a vision of "much of the land is preserved as passive open space," or "a sanctuary where wildlife and nature coexist?" Such a proposed density was not the intent or end result for the river to "receive the attention that its local, regional and national significance demands." Despite a City policy for PUDs for all future development, the proposed density becomes even more troublesome since open space preservation is only encouraged. We aren't discouraging cluster housing and site design techniques, but strongly disagree with clustering without mandatory requirements of a minimum of 50% of the site permanently preserved, particularly the natural resources, scenic resources, and other environmental features that prompted the designation as a Wild and Scenic/Critical Area. This is especially difficult to accept when the end result is 5 units per acre. We would also contend that Critical Area Rural Open Space guidelines would also be difficult to achieve under a 5 units per acre scenario, along with other Critical Area requirements such as minimization of site alteration, minimization of runoff, and standards compatible with the character and use of the river corridor. See Metropolitan Council's comments on Executive Order 79-19's Critical Area requirements relating to density, the Regional Framework, and provision of metropolitan public facilities. We also have concerns about the assumption of adding sewers to the majority of the Corridor if the one ofthe main motives is to increase and clump density within the Corridor so that other areas can remain less developed. How many sewage treatment systems that comply with state Pollution Control Agency rules are currently or close to failing? Are maintenance and construction requirements enforced so that sewers, and the high level of development needed to pay for such