The Ramsey City Council approved a site plan, preliminary plat and final plat for PACT addition and PACT Charter Schools at 7633 161st Ave. NW, currently owned by the Church of St. Katharine Drexel on a 5 to 2 vote at its July 12 meeting.
The approval paves the way for the school to build a second campus (for grades sixth to 12th) next to Central Park. PACT is an open enrollment, public charter school that has operated in Ramsey for 18 years. The new location is 2.8 miles from the existing school.
A long discussion detailing the plans and neighbors mostly speaking in opposition preceded the council’s vote. The main public concerns brought up are drainage, traffic, noise and light.
PACT proposed splitting the 33-acre property so that the school had 18 acres of the lot. The remaining acreage would be split into two outlots — one of which is intended to be used for a church, senior planner Chris Anderson said in a meeting earlier this year. As part of the application, the city plans on adding a 10 foot wide bituminous trail on the north side to 161st Avenue to Variolite Street to Central Park.
The site plan includes two access points from 161st, adding an athletic field, buffering with about 60 evergreen trees along the northern boundary.
A third access point was originally proposed off of Variolite Street, but it was eliminated as PACT’s traffic engineer and city staff did not support it.
The school’s square footage footprint would be 73,000 square feet and two stories tall for a total of 115,000 square feet. The City Council reviewed and approved the Sketch Plan and Comprehensive Plan Amendment during their meeting on March 8, according to the city’s website. The application also included a proposal to rezone the property from Rural Developing to Public/Quasi-Public which was approved by the City Council during their regular March 22 meeting.
A traffic impact study was completed, conducted by SRF Consulting Group, from a Thursday to Sunday, Ramsey City Manager Brian Hagen said.
“This allowed for traffic data during a typical school day,” Hagen said.
The study did not identify any necessary road or intersection improvements resulting from the school and future church “as those were predicted to operate at an accepted level of service.”
Several neighbors disagreed that not making any road improvements was wise as traffic will increase. They also stated that the traffic study was done on the week of Easter and conducted on weekend days so it does not give an accurate representation.
Justin Fincher, a representative of developer JB Vang Partners, disagreed and SRF compared the traffic to thousands of traffic studies conducted nationwide, creating a fair comparison.
Lighting was another concern brought up by the public. Four, 80-foot tall light structures will be used to light the athletic field.
“Those structures would include glare shields to help direct light down towards the field versus outwards toward neighboring property owners,” Hagen said.
The light would be less than 1 foot-candle, the city code does not specify a maximum foot-candle at the property boundary, Hagen explained. Their proposed lighting does not appear to violate city code.
“A lot of residents were concerned about what that light impact would be from the field area,” Hagen said.
Plans are continuing to be reviewed by engineering for drainage as well as by the Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization.
“In talking to staff they need to make revisions, yet, however they are very close in meeting those requirements,” Hagen said. “Plan revisions are still needed, but that is typical.”
Many neighbors objected to the project on the grounds that the drainage study was not yet completed.
Council Member Matt Woestehoff, who voted against the project, asked if staff had any comment on putting all the incoming added traffic on 161st, which he noted was already a difficult intersection.
“As traffic grows any time you add traffic to an intersection, you typically decrease operations and safety at that intersection,” Ramsey City Engineer Bruce Westby responded. “You run the risk of more accidents, but the intersection is designed for those movements and as noted in SRF’s study and follow-up memo, the level of service is still acceptable at that intersection — even after full build out and full use of that site.”
Council Member Chris Riley inquired if the project planners considered “taking out the football field because that fixes the water, the sound, the light, it fixes a lot of problems and you’re still building a school, which is meeting your main goal.”
Fincher responded it was only considered very early in the process.
“In the long-term needs of PACT Charter School for this facility, a football field was very much part of those conversations,” Fincher said. “To consider relocating it, it opens up a whole other logistics conversation, but also site locations and things of that nature. So if it’s not here it would be located somewhere else, and obviously if PACT is investing in a long-term facility, they would programmatically prefer the field to be at the same location.”
Council Member Ryan Heineman said it makes sense to leave the football field intact.
“We’re trying to draw families to Ramsey,” Heineman said. “We’re trying to create a better community environment, we’re trying to bring in some more morale with the city of Ramsey. I think the football field definitely does that with PACT. I think it’s definitely suited (for) being next to a park.”
He noted that the noise and light studies show that “60 decibels is equivalent to a conversation being held at the property line. I think that’s very reasonable.”
While he understands the concerns with noise and light, he feels that the PACT and its project managers have done a good job addressing them.
Ron Lindenberg, who lives behind a portion of the proposed development, said with the modifications, he still has the same concerns. He questioned the accuracy of the brightness of the lights as the poles will be built 80-feet tall.
“We’re discussing things like fences yet we haven’t determined whether the retention ponds are accurate,” Lindenberg said. “You haven’t got the final numbers on that, which obviously is a top concern from my property.”
Lindenberg said he will keep objecting until the project is a done deal, and states he may hire legal representation if the project continues.
“I feel like I’m being pushed into a corner where it’s basically a fight-or-flight situation for my property,” Lindenberg said. “I don’t believe you’re going to be able to maintain this water correctly because of the shape of the ground, not just because of where the school and football field is located, but because of the land north of us… I truly believe that this is not a good safe plan for the property, my property as well as the location they’ve decided to put this on, I believe my property is in jeopardy if this project goes through.”
Danielle Holder said the mitigation strategies that are proposed to be put in place are great, but she claimed the project team did not have enough money to construct those.
ABC Newspapers met with the neighbors at their property, and they reiterated the same claims made at the council’s meeting. They said that they wouldn’t as strongly object if the football field was removed.
Taking the football field out would make it “a lot more palatable for the neighbors. We shouldn’t be allowing lights and PA systems right next to residential,” she said. “It doesn’t fit next to the residential. We need to at least take those things out so that this project can work and then the school, which is the primary goal, can go forward without destroying the neighborhood.”
Cindy McKay, who has lived in Ramsey for 34 years, noted that she could see the lights from Central Park from four blocks away, but she spoke in favor of the project.
“I moved out here to Ramsey to be (part) of a community,” McKay said, “and having a church, a school, a stadium and a Central Park right next door seems like a great community together. I just think it’s a very good plan for our city.”
Amanda Patrow, a nearby neighbor, objected to the project on several grounds. She stated that 452 vehicles coming every morning and evening will have a detrimental impact to the neighborhood.
“I know everybody’s like ‘oh, it’s just a limited amount of time,’ but this is our neighborhood and Variolite is the only way I can get in and out of my neighborhood,” Patrow said.
“So it’s easy for somebody who doesn’t live in the area to state that a short amount of time will affect traffic.”
Fincher responded that the claims the neighbors were making are false.
“There were a number of comments made that simply aren’t true,” Fincher said. “… That the stormwater basin would simply flow over is just not true. There’s strict design guidelines that city staff … and the city of Ramsey requires, but also the Lower Rum Region requires.”
Council Member Dan Specht agreed that the council can trust the opinion of experts who have weighed in on the project.
Council Member Chelsee Howell, who voted in favor of the project, said she wished that the PACT charter school would have been placed in Ramsey’s COR.
“I was a little disappointed to have it move up towards the residential area,” she said. “With that said I’m very, very supportive of the high school coming in. I trust that the staff and the Lower Rum River Watershed management organization will be able to work with the developer and get this project where it needs to be to address the residents’ concerns.”
Woestoff said he did not support the project because he felt the council should spend more time looking at the stadium “in relation to Central Park and if there’s a better way to utilize that area between all of the organizations …”
Heineman disagreed with the neighbors’ characterization of the project.
“The idea that we’re just haphazardly throwing a school in this area without any safeguards I think is a bit of a misnomer,” Heineman said. “I don’t think you could find a better spot for a school than next to a park.”
Click Here For This Articles Original Source.
