Laserfiche WebLink
Motion carried. Voting Yes: Acting Mayor Kenneth Peterson, Councilmembers Pearson, DeLuca <br />and Cich. Voting No: None. Absent: Mayor Reimann. <br /> <br />Case # 6: Consider Policy on Extension of Time Frame Required for Platting <br /> Process. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that current City Ordinances spell out a period of time that an applicant has to <br />process and file final plats. One thing that is not spelled out is how long and how many extensions <br />should the City be granting before an approved plat is acted upon, taking into consideration that <br />ordinances and circumstances change. The same situation exists with regard to site plans. State <br />law does spell out some guidelines whereby developers have one year from the time of preliminary <br />plat approval to final plat approval and two years to record the final plat without said plat being <br />subject to changes in standards. State law does not provide any guidelines for acting upon an <br />approved site plan. <br /> <br />The consensus of the City Council was that City Ordinances should be amended to coincide with <br />State law with extensions being available beyond those time frames following a review of the said <br />development in relationship to current ordinances. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember DeLuca and seconded by Councilmember Pearson to direct City staff to <br />draft Ordinance Amendments that would grant the developer one year to receive final plat approval <br />following preliminary plat approval and two years to record the plat following final plat approval. <br />Extensions beyond these time frames will be considered on a case by case basis following a review <br />of the plat in relationship to current standards. Further, that the City Ordinance be amended to <br />require developers to enter into site plan development permits within 120 days from site plan <br />approval. Extensions to the 120 day time frame will be available upon request on a case by case <br />basis following a review of the development in relationship to current standards. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Acting Mayor Kenneth Peterson, Councilmembers Pearson, DeLuca <br />and Cich. Voting No: None. Absent: Mayor Reimann. <br /> <br />Case # 7: Supplemental Submittal for the 205 Acre MUSA Expansion. <br /> <br />Mt'. Otto stated that following City Council approval on September 24, 1990, the report addressing <br />the conditions attached to the conditional approval of the 205 acre MUSA expansion were <br />submitted to Metropolitan Council. Enclosed in the Council Agenda this evening is Metro <br />Council's review letter indicating that the submittal was deficient in two areas. The first area was <br />the need for additional information regarding the impact of the 205 acre MUSA expansion on <br />Highway 10 and Ramsey's policy on private waste water treatment facilities. Pursuant to Metro <br />Council's letter, City staff has prepared the supplemental information for Council review and <br />submittal to Metro Council. With respect to the concerns of transportation along Highway 10, City <br />staff has drafted a plan which indicates there is a sufficient capacity on Highway 10 but there is a <br />need to develop east-west arterial and a service road along Highway 10. With respect to private <br />waste water treatment facilities, the proposal is to prohibit them in Ramsey. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember DeLuca and seconded by Councilmember Pearson to approve the <br />supplementary information and policies pertaining to the 205 acre MUSA expansion. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Acting Mayor Kenneth Peterson, Councilmembers Pearson, DeLuca <br />and Cich. Voting No: None. Absent: Mayor Reimann. <br /> <br />City Council/October 23, 1990 <br /> Page 8 of 18 <br /> <br /> <br />