Ramsey Resident - 2001 - Comprehensive Plan Public Forum

Home

Why do a Comprehensive Plan? In 1976 the Minnesota Legislature passed the Metropolitan Land Planning Act which required municipalities in the 7 county metropolitan area to develop, or update existing, Comprehensive Plans as a tool to "protect the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the metropolitan area and to ensure coordinated, orderly and economic development." Recent amendments to the Land Planning Act require Comprehensive Plans to be updated and reviewed at least once every ten years to ensure conformance with the regional growth strategy for the entire Metropolitan Area. Ramsey is a growing community on the edge of a rapidly expanding metropolitan area. It is a community that faces the challenges of balancing the high demands for urban growth while protecting and preserving the City's natural resources. The Comprehensive Plan is a tool that will guide the community in managing its growth and achieving "A Vision to the Year 2020." Who prepared it and how? In 1997, the City started a public planning process to develop the Comprehensive Plan. A series of public meetings, involv- ing well over 200 citizens, were held to organize the effort, establish a vision, identify and resolve issues, and review and comment on concepts and ideas. The plan was created with the assistance of the residents, business owners, the various boards and commissions of the City, the City Council and City Staff. The City Council has discussed the Comprehensive Plan at great lengths and after several revisions, has submitted a draft of the Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council for their review. The Metropolitan Council approved the March 2001 draft of the Comprehensive Plan subject to one condition, that the City work with the Metropolitan Council to identify sufficient vacant land and limit future subdivisions in these areas to ensure that by 2040, 10,570 total sewered homes can be accommodated within the City. A Vision to the Year 2020 The vision statement for the City of Ramsey depicts how life would be in 2020 through the eyes of a typical resident. Following is a summary of the key components of the Vision. Ramsey is a community where people can live their whole lives.... Ramsey aims to preserve a part of the rural life style while providing a full range of housing to satisfy the life cycle needs of residents and blending compatible urban and rural develop- ment so they are complementary, not conflicting. Ramsey is a connected community.... Major transportation corridors have improved connection and transit opportunities promise to reduce auto travel demand in the future. Ramsey is a community with a good image.... The City will continue to focus development around the community's natural strengths and improve the image of the City. Ramsey is a community that respects and cares for its natural resources and provides an excellent parks system... Natural features are integrated into the built environment as elements of the park system and connected by the trail system. Ramsey is a healthy community with good services and a real sense of place... While Ramsey offers a substantial number of jobs and employers, it still remains more of a bedroom community with a focus on the natural features and enough commer- cial development to satisfy the needs of residents and the general public. Page 2 Land Use Issues As part of the community involvement, focus groups defined a series of issues. Through a Comprehensive Planning task force comprised of citizens, business owners and city officials, these issues were debated and resolution was reached in most cases. The following are the critical issues and resolutions. Residential Growth: Urban growth creates conflicts where it meets existing rural development. Resolution: "Well planned" growth has the following characteristics: • Blends in with existing development • Balances with infrastructure and services • Minimizes impact on existing development (cost, safety, traffic impacts) • Consistent with the natural resource base (water, wetlands, and trees) Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space: Should the City emphasize passive open space or active parks? Do all parks have to accommodate all of the same uses? Resolution: The Focus Group recommends the following: • More emphasis should be placed on open space in rural areas. • More emphasis should be placed on urban active parks in urban areas. • All parks should not be required to serve all purposes (active athletic uses should be clustered into larger parks). • The option to expand Central Park should be protected, as should the expansion capabilities of all of the City's parks. • Parks should be able to grow and change to accommodate changing demographics and numbers of residents. • Design and location of trails should be based on their use. • Opportunities to preserve open space and the urban forest should be looked into. Protect Rural Lifestyle: Urban/rural conflicts, how do we resolve them? Resolution: It was agreed that the issue of rural /urban compatibility will be addressed with the resolution of the other issues. Individual Property Rights: Rights of landowners to develop vs. rights of surrounding residents. Resolution: While everyone agreed that both residents and landowners have rights, there was no resolution of this issue. Density of Population: How to make urban and rural densities compatible? Resolution: Following are some elements of a solution to be considered: • Overall density in rural areas in the range of one unit per two to five -acres • Minimum rural lot size based on a sustainable lot size for septic systems. • Density should be relative to what is next door when future development occurs next to existing large lot development. • Urban densities allowable within MUSA. Housing Diversity: How much and in which location should diverse housing occur? Resolution: The Focus Group recommends the following: • Diversity is okay if a transition is used to make new development consistent with existing development. • Home size and cost diversity should be allowed. • Mobile homes should not be allowed. • Minimum home size with garages should be required. MUSA Expansion: Should MUSA be expanded for residential development? Where should it expand? Should it have to require a referendum? (charter was amended to require a referendum) Resolution: The Focus Group unanimously supported the following: • MUSA expansion is acceptable for commercial and industrial development. • MUSA expansion should not create costs for existing rural residential owners unless they want services. • Generally, MUSA expansion is acceptable westerly along Highway 10. The Focus Group could not agree unanimously with the following: • MUSA expansion allowable for petitioners who want services and are adjacent to the MUSA boundary. • Support of a planning rather than referendum approach for MUSA expansion. Land Use Map Insert