Agenda - Council - 02/09/1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

FROM DORN L~W FIRM, LTD Mendota I-feigh~, 510 NV?' 2d 264(Mn App, 1994), a copy of which I enclose, our appeals court ruled that where a city denied a re-zoning request from low-density residential to high-density residential, based on a concern that high-density usage was incompatible with adjacent land uses mud air traffic, such a dcrdal was legal, even though leaving the present zoning in place was in conflict with the city's comprehensive plan. Thc development plan which accompanies the present zoning request reveals a plat of over two hundred lots, which by thc developer's own admission, is likely to produce 10 vehicular trips per day (or 2,000+ addidon~l trips total) per dwelling. Neither the effect of this traffic on the local street system, nor thc hydrologic effect of creating perhaps twenty ayres of impervious surfaces due to roads, driveways and rooftops, has been studied. If after study, the CityofRamsey finds, as did the City of Mcndota Heights, that the proposed land use is simply too intense in relationship to adjoining land uses and infrastructure, the above cited case would give clear authority to the City to deny the zoning request, regardless of the comprehensive plan. Until this study has be. em done, it would, be extremely premature for the City to grant the request. This information produces yet another reason for the City to table action on the proposed zoning request. There is no compelling reason for the City to act on the matter at this time, and in light of all the information presented by my recent correspondences, I reiterate that prudence would dictate tabling action on this matter until the City's own legal counsel can review the situation. Wilb~ I I I I I I I I I I i I I I i I I I I