Laserfiche WebLink
Erika Sitz, 6521 154~' Lane NW - "In general these comments are focused on issues the task <br />force discussed. They are not in straight order but how I looked through it. A few comments are <br />strictly small technical errors (tech). Many "comments" are actually "questions". In general, I <br />liked the way the plan handled residents' concerns. I didn't want to say everywhere "I like this," <br />but if there is no comment that's true. For many policy questions, I not only liked them, but <br />would probably strongly object to changes or deletions. <br /> <br />p.29-38 Residential <br />p.20 What is (are) source(s) for these assumptions <br /> #3 "public water service" in future - where did this come from? Why? How? <br /> #7 definition of"conducive" <br />MC = Metropolitan Council <br />p.21 "Projections are not requirements"- Where does this come from? MC? Please elaborate. <br />p.26 "residents" v. "landowners" - could we find a more neutral distinction? e.g. owners of <br />large potentially developable land. I am a landowner of the place at which I reside. <br /> <br />p.29 (tech) "rural estates average 2.5 acres." Definition is >5 acres in Appendix A. <br />p.29 Don't go wild on "life cycle" housing concept blindly and too soon. Older residents <br /> moved out to Ramsey for large lots, which they now don't want to maintain perhaps, but <br /> probably would desire senior housing elsewhere in metro closer to amenities or also near <br /> family elsewhere. Newer residents might look to Ramsey to provide senior housing that <br /> more closely resembles what they live in now. This doesn't mean that I think no life- <br /> cycle is necessary. Just no cookbook formulas. <br />p.30 Septic system/soils - This is important fact to be stressed. <br />p.32 #9 "Petitioning" - Is this the procedure in charter? <br />p.33 #3 "Inspections" - Is this for new development? For replacement systems? Everywhere? <br /> Inspection OK if reasonable frequency, not a harassment. <br />p.34 & elsewhere I like the Greenway idea, especially as described on p.34 as "low- <br /> maintenance natural vegetation." This should be true everywhere. <br /> Greenway ¢ playgrounds and ballfields. Also credits for clustering or <br /> greenway must include permanent preservation of the natural features, to the <br /> benefit of the general public, but also that first residents don't get stuck with <br /> teeny "sun lots" and the woods become Phase II development. <br />Places to work <br />Has Ramsey been included in any regional study about infrastructure for telecommuting? I don't <br />see a possibility of development of professional level technical jobs locating in Ramsey. <br />Telecommuting for these residents has implications on transportation needs. I suggest looking at <br />this, if not here, then in some other context. <br />p.41 "Bridge" - I like the terminology of"whether," not merely where/when? Suggest future <br /> task forces and any discussion adopt terminology of"improved river crossing" of which a <br /> second bridge is merely one option (other being improved Ferry Street corridor). <br />p.45-49 Staging plan - Does this incorporate existing policy? Where from? To expand to a <br /> general statement, there are other places where source of quote would make it clearer <br /> and more meaningful. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/December 1, 1998 <br /> Page 8 of 11 <br /> <br /> <br />