Agenda - Council - 04/09/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Attorney Goodrich noted that March 26, 2002 is the date the Council has to take action, if the applicant wants to extend the time line he can do that otherwise the Council will have to take action before March 26, 2002. He stated that the Council could move to table action and direct staff to draft findings of fact in the positive and negative. Mayor Gamec inquired if Ms. Horn be willing to work with Mr. Kurak on developing a plan for the site. Julie Horn, 6031 145th Lane NW, Ramsey, stated that she would like to work with the family, but she also felt there needed to be a round table of people from each area of the existing neighborhoods. Mayor Gamec stated that if to many people get involved then things don't get resolved. He stated that he would like to see a couple people be representatives for the neighborhood to meet with the developer. Ms. Horn inquired as to why the issue came this far without a plan. Mayor Gamec replied that it was the procedure they were told to follow. Ms. Horn stated that Section 9.03.02 states that the City should have had a plan to look at and the proper fees should have been paid. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the Council is considering 14 amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and the City did not follow the proper procedures and collect the appropriate fees for those amendments. Councihnember Anderson requested that Community Development explain why they handled the amendments as they did. Community Development Director Frolik explained that there were 14 proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan that spun off from the public hearing last June and the process was started through the Planning Commission. In December the Council adopted a Comprehensive.Plan before seeing the recommendation and then a legal opinion from Kennedy and Graven and it was suggested that the requests be considered as formal requests. City Attorney Goodrich stated that when the City receives and accepts a written application it allows the applicant to have certain property rights, if they did not want to do that the application should have been rejected. Once the City takes the application it is not fair to stop the process, which is why they are in the position without fees being paid. Councihnember Anderson stated that in the future the fees should be charged, but the decision not to collect the fees was a decision made at the administrative level and was done in good faith. City Council/February 26, 2002 Page 21 of 35 -45-