Agenda - Council - 09/12/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

POLICY ON EXURBAN DEVELOPMENT By: Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator and Sylvia Frolik, Zoning Administrator CASE # 4 As you recall, h4r. Wilbur Dom approached the City Council with a sketch plan for development of townhomes at Se Rum River Hills P.U.D. prior to the availability of municipal sewer and sanitary water. At that time, City Staff recommended denial of the proposal because it conflicted with the Comprehensiv~ Plan, the development regulations in the Rural Transition District, and its precedent setting nature. Council and Mr. Dorn then entered into an addendum to the Rum River Hills developrr~e~ nt agreement wherein it was established that the City would establish criteria for reviewing devilopment proposals for property outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). z On August 2 arid August 9, 1994, City Staff presented the Planning Commission and City Council respectively with.a' resolution to establish review criteria for development proposals outside the MUSA. Both qntmes were of the opinion that the proposed resolution was nebulous and would be difficult to interpret and implement. City Staff has a~gain met and reviewed the draft resolution taking into consideration the comments made by the Planning Commission and City Council. City Attorney Goodrich also met with Staff and it was dete[rmined that adoption of a resolution that would consider approval of ex-urban development wDuld at a minimum require adoption of an ordinance to amend the Zoning Chapter of City Code, ajqd possibly an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Staff also determined that the proposed r~solution to consider ex-urban development could open the doors for similar development p~,oposals and without sufficient grounds to deny others, the City might be violating the 4 in 40 dethsity policy and jeopardizing pending MUSA expansions critical to important residential and c~ommercial projects .... Given the abo~e, Staff has changed its opinion on this case and determined that it may be more appropriate to .ileal with these kinds of proposals on an ad hoc or case by case basis absent a Council policy 6r authorizing ordinance. As for Mr. Do~n's proposal for townhomes at Rum River Hills, Staff would like to suggest the following in order to allow this project to be considered at the preliminary plat stage: a) The development of 12 townhouse units on the property will actually be a reduction i~n the density originally approved at the sketch plan stage of the PUD from 1 unit Per 2.6 acres to 1 unit per 4.5 acres. b) ~3ven with sanitary sewer and municipal water, a density of 30-40 units originally approved at the sketch plan stage is not appropriate in this area immediately adjacent t~o large-lot single family homes. c) There is the opportunity to enhance thC eXisting development agreement and the ~,alue of neighboring single family homes by approving 12 townhomes now rather t~han being obligated to allow the development of 30-40 apartments in the future. d) ~qith the development of the townhomes, the density will still be less, 1 unit per 4.5 acr. es, than the approved density for a similar PUD in Ramsey with a golf course, 1 amt per 4.25 acres.