Agenda - Council - 05/09/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I i I I ! I I I I I I I I Cit{/of RamseY 15153 ~OWTHEN BOULEVARD N.W., RAMSEY, MINNESOTA 55303 , k PHONE (612) 427-1410 FAX (612) 427-5543 'lTD (612) 427-8591 December 20, 1994 Mr. Mark Kleckner White Dove Realty, ~c. 907 Main Street Elk River, MN 55330 Dear Mr. Kleckncr: On Thursday, November 3, 1994, you met with representatives of the City of Ramsey's staff development committee. At that meeting, we discussed the status of the proposed Fox Knoll plat located just west of ~e Haubrich Addition at 151st Lane N.W. and County Road #5 in Ramsey. You had previously ~ppeared in front of the Planning Commission and the City Council seeking approval of a rural st~bdivision of this property. At the October 25, 1994 Council meeting, staff recommended agains! the approval. Our position was tha~ the property is located in the urban transition area and, therefore, should be preliminary platted s~ as to facilitate the eventual platting at urban densities. Further, it was our expectation that this l~roperty would be included in the Metropolitan Urban Serdce Area (MUSA) by the end of the ye&. Also, our recently completed water systems study provided for a water main through this proi~erty. Finally, it is our plan to provide water and sanitary sewer main within a few hundred feet of!hisrt' parcel early in 1995. . Council tabled actionicontingent upon attorney review of the issue. Your partner, Mr. Bob Essig, representing your deg, elopment at the October 25, 1994 meeting, suggested that you had a legal right to preliminary plat the parcel at rural densities. City staff presented the opposite view. Council suggested res,?Iving these differences by the legal review. You and I agreed to d~lay the legal review until after we could sort this situation out Ourselves. To date, our attorney has iaot been requested to proceed with such a review. At the meeting of NOVember 3, 1994, you represented a $45,000 investment in'the land. You requested assurances ithat the property will be within the MUSA in a timely fashion and you requested clarification~ of utility trunk costs. You further asked if the utilities were sized sufficient to provide service to p~:operty you control west of Fox Knoll. Finally, you requested consideration for your holding cost 6f the property due to the delay of one construction season. I cannot provide an abzolute assurance that this property will ever be included within the MUSA. However, our request t'or a MUSA expansion has been submitted since October 1993. According to Mr. Bob Davis of th'~ Metropolitan Council staff, the full board will consider this request at their January 12, 1995 meriting. He has not received any negative responses to the request, and has received only one question to which we supplied a satisfactory answer. The Metropolitan Council staff is recommending hpproval.