Agenda - Council - 10/23/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE CONSIDER POLICY ON EXTENSION OF TIME FRAME REQUIRED FOR PLATTING PROCESS; By: Zoning Administrator Sylvia Frolik Background: As you know, the City receives numerous requests for extensions to the recording time frames for subdivisions. The City also receives requests for extensions to the time frame for filing for final plat approval following preliminary plat approval. Observations: The City Code states the following procedure for platting: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) Submittal of Sketch Plan Submittal of Preliminary Plat Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing regarding Preliminary Plat Council Action on preliminary plat within 60 days of the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing regarding preliminary plat. Developer files the final plat with the Zoning Officer wkhin 6 months of preliminary plat approval, unless an extension is granted. Council action on final plat approval within 60 days of the date on which it was filed with the Zoning Officer. Developer to record the plat at the County withing 120 days of final plat approval, unless an extension is granted. Without established parameters, the platting procedure could virtually span years and this is not a desirable situation, especially if there have been amendments to the Subdivision Chapter of City Code in the interim. In researching State Statute 462.358/Subd. 3c., I have found that for one year following preliminary approval and for two years following final approval, unless the subdivider and the municipality agree otherwise, no amendment to a comprehensive plan or official control shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout, or dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application. Following those time frames, the municipality may grant extensions pursuant to current regulations and performance standards or require a new application unless substantial physical activity and investment has been spent on the plat as it was previously approved. I have also contacted other communities to determine if limits have been established with respect to platting procedures. Andover's Subdivision Code is almost identical to Ramsey's; however, they are rarely approached for extensions and have not found a need to establish limits. Elk River has recently found themselves in a situation of allowing a plat that was approved several years ago to finally be recorded and which under their current subdivision standards would be considered nonconforming. City Staff at Elk River has defined a need to set limits on extensions to platting procedures. The City of Anoka's subdivision code is also general in reference to extensions and when necessary, they grant extensions to the plating procedure within the parameters set by State Statute referenced above.