Agenda - Council - 12/09/2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The intent of the ordinance as I understand it was to protect the communities finances in the eventual acquisition of the properties along Highway 10 now that it is apparent that the Highway will need to be relocated in such a manner that the properties in the corridor cannot feasibly be maintained. The City Council, in it's stewardship of the Cities affairs, made the decision to direct in a logical manner the future development of the land within the city limits and specifically in the Highway 10 corridor. This was done so that the future growth of the city could be accomplished with foresiglxt and planning taking into consideration the good of the community as a whole. An integral part of the intent of the Ordinance was Certainly understood' to be the mitigation of future unnecessary expense to the community by limiting the development of properties that would just require demolition to make way for Highway 10 in the near future. This commitment was also evidenced by the passage of Resolution #02-01-007 endorsing Mn/DOT'S vision and corridor management plan and committing to work in partnership with Mn/DOT and other Partners along the corridor to implement the recommendations of the Management Plan. Granting this Exception is not only within the intent of the Ordinance but it is exactly what was intended by controlling the development in the corridor. The proposed improvements are consistent with the vision of the city and will create a welcoming property to residents as well as to visitors to the City of Ramsey. At the same time they do not substantially increase the value of the property, so granting the exception will not increase the eventual cost of acquisition. The improvements are within the current scope of the property use, they will serve to make it more usable, economically viable and aesthetically pleasing to the community. I believe that all five of the requirements for an exception to be granted are met in this particular case. The spirit of the Ordinance was to restrict development that would be detrimental to the common good of the community. Clearly in this case the moratorium creates a situation that is detrimental to the common good. By granting the exception the city will benefit from the enhancement of the subject property as well as the addition of a major brand retailer operating in the city. All without substantially adding to the underlying cash value of the property in question. The whole goal of this Moratorium was to inject common sense into the development along highway 10 and to plan and provide for the future. This exception does provide for the future and at the same time does not penalize the owner of the property nor a prospective new business in the city. This exception encourages the preservation of what is already there without adding to the cormuunity's burden in the future. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, Ronald J. Touchette